Member Info for adoubleuk

Bloobird,

"There's understandably a lot of anger on this BB at the moment but, when I read the RNSs yesterday, my feelings were more of a deep sadness ... like being at a funeral with hundreds of fellow mourners."

But let's face it, sadness is a generally introspective emotion , from which one may slowly recover, possibly with enhanced wisdom. Whereas anger is impulsive, often leading oneself to actions which can be hurtful not only to others, but also oneself.

There are some fools here talking about 'legal action' against the company, because they've lost some money. But they haven't a leg to stand on. They didn't read the small print, under the general header 'risk'.

jax05,

Is 'jax05' a personalised numberplate? Some people might be tempted to misread it.

SG2,

"best wishes, Adouble."

And to you too. Hope you haven't been hurt too bad by this latest.

As mentioned, I've sold all but a single share, which leaves me with 'easy access' in case things turn around (and doubt they will), but also to retain a morally defensible reason for occasionally posting here. Though I suspect posts will be few and far between, once the dust settles.

Likewise, as the company no longer seems what it once appeared to be, nor will this BB. I doubt that many of the longterm contributors with longterm holdings will post much any more.

It's been interesting and fun, and in fact I've met a few people due to that with whom I still consider myself to be on good terms. I'll miss it.

Music for the weekend (like in happier days).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSur0mFviT0

Yeah. What a long strange trip it's been. And if you listen to the lyrics of that song, maybe there's a moral hidden somewhere. Harking back to words written by Robert Louis Stevenson in 1881, "To travel hopefully is better than the arrival", which in themselves go back to a far earlier Taoist proverb, "The journey is the Reward".

'Til later, it's been fun (but no longer is), heartfelt commiserations to the many who've lost bigtime, and 'thanks for all the fish'.

jax05,

Glad to see you signed your name at the bottom of your post.

Well this has been a fairly horrid day, hasn't it ? Doesn't make me any happier knowing I was right when posting late last night that the SP could move either way come the morning.

AsI posted much earlier today, I sold at a loss pdq after skimming the RNS, other than (as always) retaining just one share for 'easy access' reasons. You never can tell...

Didn't watch the webcast live, but read the presentation as soon as it was published, and listened to the QA. Agree with others here that there must have been a lot of 'selection' regarding the questions coming in 'live' !

Despite some initial scepticism, I'm sorry to admit that the presentation made a few things suddenly appear clearer to me, or at least that's how it seems to me right now. Though a lot is sort of intuition and supposition: 'imho' kind of stuff.

I reckon I now have a resonable idea as to why Dr Trice was far from his previously bouncy self during that hopeless CMD webcast. Because by then the writing was well and truly on the wall, and he must have been aware of it. It was last year that Beverly Smith joined the board, as 'non executive'. We were never really told why she'd been signed-up. But I reckon she had a specific mission, and that was to head up a technical re-evaluation 'squad'. Maybe at Kerogen's insistance, backed by Spirit, who can tell?

Some things both explicit and implicit rather shock me. Page 11 of the presentation being one of them, paticularly the graph. I think it's data we haven't seen before (or at least I don't remember having done so), especially the well 7 wireline samples and the oil percentage by depth. That should been a huge warning sign. Extrapolating OWC from samples containing less than 5% oil strikes me as being the experimenter looking at the results through rose-tinted specs, and seeing what he wanted to see, rather than a 'dodgy scenario'. And I do suspect that wearing rose-coloured spects might have been a weakness on Dr Trice's part, and I still refuse to believe that at any step of the way was he trying to deliberately mislead people.

I was nevertheless also shocked to read that Halifax had been P&A'd at the same time as Whirlwind. The 'voyage of the Seawell' is now explained. Even the Whirlwind part we only knew about later, but by then I suspect Dr T was no longer actively at the helm of communications with investors.

Another part of the presentation shocks me, and that's now the new 'spin' being put on the Victory and Rona Sandstones as a possible 'lifeboat'. This makes me mistrust the BoD, and augers badly for the future.

So. What a long strange trip it's been.

I reckon I now know why Dr T 'vanished softly and silently away'.

The Snark was a Boojum, you see...

ngms27

"Under the investors section."

I still can't find it. All I can find is the RNS. Whereas Cebo and others have referred to 'slides', ie a Powerpoint thing, even if in pdf form. Can anyone send a link ?

Cebo,

Presentation is already available on the website"

WHERE on the website? I can't find it.

In my earlier post I wrote

"After all, there's a 'suspended' well up there (Halifax) which will ultimately require either re-entry or abandonment. Unless that's somehow been done on the quiet. "

Having re-read the RNS, I now see that Halifax was P&A'd at the same time as Whirlwind. 'On the quiet'. That was a bit naughty not to tell us.

johnpwh,

"I'd like to hear what Trice has to say for himself. Its less than 6 months since a CMD presentation that gave no indication of any problems. In comes a new broom and (15? ) years of work are suddenly irrelevant and was all wrong?"

The most sensible post I've read so far today.

I have been a longterm supporter and 'believer' in the Hurricane story for a number of years, so naturally today's RNS comes as a severe shock. I'm at present (I'll admit it) in something of 'denial' regarding the technical news, but my justification for this is that we are not directed to any detailed documentation supporting the new 'claims' being put forward. Essentially everything we've been learning about over the years has been stood on its head in a very short space of time, but we have nothing substantial on which to base the new beliefs, nor any idea as to who has reached the new conclusions, nor how.

Obviously though, one cannot be in denial as to the effect on the SP, so as soon as I skimmed the RNS and looked at the SP, I put in a sell order (for the second time this year) at a loss, and this time I see no likelihood of ever buying back in.

I do have a prediction, though. Once the inevitable heat has died down, Hurricane will become another obscure little struggling oiler, rather than the pioneering outfit it's previously been known as. So it'll probably go unnoticed when some major comes along and takes the whole thing over at a cent on the dollar. The new BoD has been remarkably quick in relinquishing the acreage north of Lancaster, up to and including Halifax, even though it costs peanuts to retain it. I wonder who will take that over ? After all, there's a 'suspended' well up there (Halifax) which will ultimately require either re-entry or abandonment. Unless that's somehow been done on the quiet. Nobody will notice when such a takeover occurs.

BTFAITH1

"will tomorrow bring 9p or 3p?"

Aye, Therby lies the rub. Because (to my personal disappointment) the company has not seen fit to publish their so-called 'Technical Review' in advance of the interim financial report.

So to my mind today's somewhat surprising 22% SP hike may be nothing based on 'leaks of good news', nor anything like that, but just the stockmarket professionals stealing yet more PI's money.

It's the 'Technical Review' I want to see. The financials are different, 'cos the company is still OK for cash. For now.

And I can't help wondering about something. Robert Trice (ex-CEO) was retained in an 'advisory capacity' after leaving his directorate post. I wonder if his name will be appended to this 'review' ?

Only a few hours 'til we find out. But dammit, it means I'll have to wake up early. Why do these things on a Friday, and especially in the morning?

PlantedBHA,

Some stuff for you.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QXeHAuCTaQ

(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hqzzqX3VCc

(3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-h0MDpnKIE

(4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5RDTK5jZxM

(5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5ZycJC-pmo

Which one applies to you (or you like) the most ?

By the way, I was in the audience for (1) & (4). Number (5) I just put in for 'Missdosh' . Rockfield !

Conklo,

Thanks for that. Looks like the 'planned and announced maintenance' is started. Even if it tends to disprove my initial supposition that the shutdown last month was maybe the maintenance 'brought forward',

I'd tend to disagree with your statement 'most offshore outages never go to plan', though. 'Planned maintenance' means what it says, and involves 'planning', which if it's any good involves contingencies for possible repairs that might be found necessary. Bluewater won't be penalised for 'planned maintenance time', but they will be if there's an overrun.

Admire your photos, by the way. :-)) Obviously using 'long glass'. Impossible to guess from the orientation of the boat where you're taking them from, because of course she 'weathervanes'.

But I can guess...

"I'm still in Lockdown in Greater Manchester just been extended again.! ...Other than that, hows the Poker playing going? "

(Hope LSE won't mind some OT stuff in passing)

Lockdown finished with here, but that doesn't mean life is 'normal'. Brilliant blue skies, but not a jet vapour-trail to be seen. Weird. I can't go into my local bar and lean on the counter, drink a coffee and read the newspaper. Stuff like that.

Poker now going OK again, though the number of casinos reopened requires terrible road-miles ! But 'private games' are now regular. But not paying my rent, like previously. Everyone just hunkering-down to see what the winter will bring, I think.

Hi Jiffy !

Just a personal note to say 'hi' and glad to see the nightshift's still at work !

Can't really answer the questions you posed, but we're living in strange times...

Just trawling around again, I found this on page 36 of the 'Aim Admission Document'.

Make of it what you will.

"1.10The Group’s success is dependent upon its ability to attract and retain key personnel. The Group’s success depends, to a large extent, on certain of its key personnel having expertise inthe areas of exploration and development, operations, engineering, business development, oil and gas marketing, finance and accounting. The Group was founded by Dr Trice and since then a number of key people have been retained by the Group and these people are influential to the development and continued operation of the Group’s business. The loss of the services of any key personnel (in particular Dr Trice) could have a material adverse effect on the Group.The Group does not maintain, nor does it plan to obtain, insurance against the loss of any of its key personnel."

The Paul B. Loyd Jnr drilling rig has just departed Comarty Firth. But not for us. She's heading for Norway.

PlantedBHA,

"We are going drilling ...."

Just for once, you may be correct.

Since the last couple of RNS's (not today's), I've been wondering about the 'way forward' IF the new BoD announces any significant changes to the perceived 'model' in their upcoming Technical Review. Because leaving aside the watercut issue, the reservoir engineers' interpretation of the field (s) is based on data acquired through the exploratory boreholes such as the Lancaster 7 'pilot hole', and not the producers. Or rather, data such as that pertaining to OWC, fracture density, and so on. So IF changes are announced, certain logical suppositions are unavoidable. Such as

1 The original data is somhow 'wrong' (which is doubtful)
or
2 The subsequent number-crunching and analysis of the data was somehow mismanaged and thus the wrong conclusions were reached (this despite third-party review by RPS in the CPR's)
or

3 Insufficient data was acquired to justify field-wide interpretations to be made.

If (3) is the case, it would explain the OGA's desire that further drilling be done, so further data can be gathered. And either way, if the company announces any significant material changes, they are obliged to provide evidence to 'prove' their case, and the best way to do this would be to drill another 'science project' hole and perform further logging, even if it's done wearing spectacles of a different shade than those worn previously !

Whatever happens, and in the light of today's RNS, I very much hope that the technical review will be published by the 9th at least, to give investors sufficient time to digest its contents, whatever they may be. A Q&A session on the 11th will be a fairly pointless exercise if it's based purely on 'news' announced just a few hours previously.

Geowiz,

"A major would be shutting this down and mothballing the project until higher oil prices make it viable. "

I don't agree with all you've said. The project is still viable in cash terms, so there's no reason to 'mothball' it now (assuming a takeover by a major).

But many times in the past, in my interminable posts which many of you have got fed up with, I've drawn a parallel between Dr Trice's company and that of Sir James Dyson and his vacuum cleaners. And especially (for anyone who's read Dyson's memoirs) the battles he had with Hoover. Who wanted to buy all his patents, and then put his machine on a high back-shelf to never become marketed. Until a lot later on, and when it suited them.

There's one difference, though. Dyson never went public, and thus subject to 'market pressure'.

I now, however, feel that Hurricane Energy is in the same situation. Except that unlike Dyson, Dr Trice has decided to duck out. He's done OK and proved his point.

PlantedBHA,

"22 minutes in on Q and A this year ( chaffe CFO)"

Unfortunately, and despite many attempts, I have been unable to watch that so-called CMD shoddy webcast throughout without falling to sleep or switching on the telly instead. Especially when Grommitt and Wallace (one-time 'production operations Director plus new CFO) came on, 'cos they both seemed made out of plasticine.

If they've moved the goalposts regarding the 'BP contract' I think we should have been informed.

Planted BHA,

"Negotiated 6-8 weeks prior to lifting.

Balls.

The situation is this (from page 266 of the 'AIM Admission Document' :

"The price which BP pays Hurricane for the oil it buys under the BP Contract is dependant upon theprice at which BP sells such oil to third parties including a profit sharing factor for Hurricane,based on such sale price. As such, BP’s payment to Hurricane is calculated by taking (i) the averageof all the high and low quotations on Platts Crude Oil Marketwire for Dated Brent during the firstfive days of the Bill of Lading month (subject to BP’s election to adopt such average from a periodat the end of a month); plus (ii) the differential to Dated Brent in BP’s on-sale price to third partyofftakers FOB at the delivery point (or, if delivery terms are not FOB at the delivery point, then thedifferential is netted back to BP at a level that reasonably reflects a FOB delivery point differentialto Dated Brent using the actual figures); less (iii) a marketing fee.The marketing fee consists of a fixed fee element (US$0.30 per barrel up to 15 million barrelsmarketed and US$0.15 per barrel where over 15 million barrels are marketed) and the abovementioned profit share element (calculated as 25 percent of the difference between the on-saledifferential and an agreed benchmark value based on the oil’s expected market value)."