The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
It is also interesting that not only are these all giant fields, but they share a close proximity to each other, over a long period of time, 1950's to 2000 for North Africa. It seems to be suggesting that as concepts and technology evolve then revisiting these areas is revealing new discoveries or newly viable commercial fields. As you pointed out there is a big (Moroccan) gap in the chain. May that gap be filled imminently.
AGD62
Hello All,
Yesterday I expressed my unresearched opinion that I was dismayed about a possible PE involvement. However GRH is of an informed opinion that this is something that should be welcomed.
I have dismissed the opinion of GRH before to my detriment in connection with another company. I do not intend to make the same mistake again so will revise my opinion.
ATB
AGD62
Hello Oldslow65,
Regarding your post yesterday of 11.38, may I respectfully redirect you to the attachment on my post @ 11:05 and the opening part of a pensioner who had made a £400 investment and received a cheque for £720,000, a 1800 bag return.
This is what is possible, but can not be a direct read across to any other company as there are a lot of aspects to consider.
Hope that makes this mornings breakfast more palatable.
ATB
AGD62
hello all,
as the subject of poor communications has once again been raised, i thought i would add the following for some balance. it contrasts the communication styles of two e&p ceos, so i feel has some relevance and i was invested in both companies.
1) james parson (ex ceo of sound energy plc) was a showman of communications. he arranged a presentation in morocco with helicopter site visits to site, then did a presentation in the shard with a lot of fan fare, then became more down scale with a boat trip on the river thames, and ended up in a converted cellar bar. he talked the share price from a few pence up to about a £1 and then all the way back to pence. and he delivered exactly nothing! he talked but didn't walk. i won't comment on his shareholding.
2) tom cross (ex ceo of dana petroleum plc) he was the polar opposite with the barest of communications, basically only that which was an obligatory requirement. the share price, when i held sat around the 60p mark, i sold out only for a few months later the company to be sold out at a hostile take over of about £18 per share. he walked and didn't talk.
i attach a link to an article (2010) about tom cross, which some may find of interest. also note the timeline.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/marketforceslive/2010/oct/20/parkhead-tom-cross-dana
i know which style appeals to me. i'm very comfortable with paul's communication style. i will go as far as to say i find it reassuring. you make your own decisions.
ps: as a rule i now avoid those companies run by "pea****s". show and noise and not much action.
atb
agd62
Hello Sefton82,
Thank you for your post which echos my own views.
I was dismayed when I heard Paul mention PE as a possibility. I have viewed the low price of this share as an open invitation to keep adding to my position. I have learnt a great deal about patience and despite disappointing delays, I'm prepared to settled down and wait for the first delivery of a gas sale, which is what I see will be the catalyst for an upward trajectory of the share price.
As Paul has often stated, he is a geologist of great experience and as such I really want him to focus on proving up the potential of Guercif.
ATB
AGD62
Hello Jimmy123
After your post of yesterday 17/03 @20:23 I see there is a post questioning your motives for being here, which has a few supporters.
I'm not one of those who supported that post and although I expressed concerns when I first came across your posts I subsequently retracted my concerns and I stand by that retraction.
I do read your posts with interest and as far as I can see you are like someone I knew who would question his own decisions, looking for the pitfalls in his thinking. Not unlike inversion thinking. (If you have an idea of what might go wrong you can best protect yourself from such an outcome).
In analogy terms I see you as someone walking down a forest path towards your destination, but continually looking for the bears and wolves that may be lurk on either side. I see nothing wrong, or troll like, in that.
Please keep posting.
PS, I'm not the person to answer your queries from the referred to post.
ATB
AGD62
Hello Ibiza,
You are right about the Keith's 75 / 657 = 1.14 m³ methane per m³ source rock being a decimal place out, however it is just a typing error and also excludes M for million m³. If you look at his next line it is 1.14B m³ methane per km³ source rock and his calculation is back on track.
Hope this helps
AGD62
Hello Donalb 22:04 and 14:15.
Apologies for the misinterpretation of your on paper cone calculations with a mock up model.
I certainly hope it was taken as being intended to be a dig at you.
AGD62
So, we have had a week of this board being dominated by utter rubbish.
An RNS about a positive outcome regarding T&T has been brushed aside by a deluge of posts complaining about a missed report deadline of 16 October for testing and in conjunction with this complaints about poor communications. A big deal has been made out making it out to be far more significant than it is. There have been some strong accusations made, which wouldn't stand up to basic scrutiny. A lie originates at the time a statement is made, not at a future point in time.
Along with the RNS any attempts by decent, informed posters, to make positive contributions to this board have been swept away by this wave of nonsense.
My assessment of the week is that the above has been a concerted act of desperation, throwing everything at the board this week. But they are busted trying to bluff, without as much as a pair of two's, and have also lost all credibility of offering an alternative point of view.
My filter bin has been put into overload. I have to admit that there are a few posters who have surprised me and for now will be on a watch list, but as for the rest they have demonstrated that they have nothing of value to contribute.
For the decent posters that remain, in all ranges of knowledge, I think it unlikely that they will fail to offer the alternative view if it is considered appropriate.
Regarding Paul and Lonny, I'm happy with how they are choosing to run our company and confident that they will inform shareholders of events as and when appropriate. Although I would appreciate a payday in the not to distant future.
To all the decent people on this board or just keeping in the background.
GLA
AGD62