Member Info for aligator

duster, Are you on the right page?

Frankly I have no clue as to what is going on. I can try and believe, as others say , that the price is reflecting buy/sell equilibrium but this simply does not reconcile a market cap of £60m against a core asset pre tax npv of £500m.
The company needs to do something and publishing the Harvey results seems like a good idea. However, the lengthening silence on Harvey suggests all is not ship shape.
Where do we go from here? Maybe wait for the herd to realise the buy opportunity here or , as before, sit and wait.

Lack of RNS is now beginning to put questions into my mind. I would like to think that the well results have been analysed and the delay is because CalEnergy has triggered its option for 50% - so documentation being the reason.

Sailor, The reality is that nobody knows what is going on. This is company with a derisked core project pre tax value of £500m Thames pipeline 3rd party tariffs, Harvey development and further acreage acquisition will hopefully have a significant positive impact on this value. So why is the current market cap only £88m? Call it a buying opportunity if you wish but it is nonetheless difficult to compute. Meanwhile the trading board shows sale after sale after sale but the sp remains stable.
Like you, I have been here for the long haul and now believe it is not so much fingers crossed but "when".
Good luck.

I just find this share price movement impossible to comprehend given the de-risked, positive fundamentals that underpin IOG.
No doubt it is not helped by the continual negativity posted here by some. Deramping springs to mind to parallel the shenanigans of the mm's and, I believe, the ii's.

Daftas, I share your sentiments and have long stated that it is the mm's and ii's who control this share price for the time being and, similarly I guess, most start-up/early stage companies on AIM. Personally, I think it is shameful that a company that has de-risked its balance sheet to such a degree and is about to embark of the recovery of over £500m NPV of gas in the long term is constricted by the antics of these entities such that its market cap is a mere fraction of it future value. Ok, the company has to prove it is capable of extracting the gas and bringing it to market but the fact that the share price is currently so low against the background of many strong fundamentals speaks volumes for AIM.
I would hope that once the herd really starts to take interest in this opportunity the sp will begin to reflect the current value of the company.
I am not an investment professional, just an ex-banker but well versed in risk analysis and corporate evaluation. So, like you, making sense of the sp at the moment is a mystery.

In Tokyo for the rugby!
Welcome RNS which further de-risks the company - indeed, it secures it medium/long term future.
Don't underestimate the potential value of the CalE tie-up. This is a company with almost limitless financial backing and there is a clear expansion objective being shown by Berkshire Hathaway within this industry, which, in the case of the UK, will presumably be funnelled through IOG.
Looking at the numbers, assuming the post tax NPV of the core project will be around £400m - based on ca 20% tax liability and a hypothetical future total issued shares of ca 650m , the value of each share just from the core project would be ca 60-65p, in line with broker forecasts. However, this does not include Harvey, third party pipeline tariff income and upside from further licensing rounds with CalE. Harvey alone could be worth 10-20p per share.
It will be interesting to see where the sp heads when trading opens in London. With all known info, it is now hard to see this drifting below 20p again.

Peakview, I am sure you are correct. Frankly, however, I have given up in trying to read sense into the trading board. Since I am a long term holder, I have become disinterested in the short term trading antics of mm's, ii's etc but rather focus on the long term fundamentals of this company. That said, as I have commented countless times before, a current market cap of ca £60m against an NPV of £300-400m in the core project alone just reinforces my view that AIM is manipulated by the few at the expense of the many.
I wholly agree that this is a buying opportunity and remain, like other posters here, positive about the medium/long term. I am aware that the BoD has previously mentioned November in terms of various announcements but I am disappointed that it has not felt able to provide an interim update to shareholders on the various matters at hand.

PP1, Nothing significant to contribute at this time except to comment that the share price is now 1.5p less than the 20p bid by RockRose early in the year. This values the company at ca £63m versus the ca £300-350m npv of core project assets awaiting FID. To be honest, I remain somewhat mystified by the performance of the sp - I have given up trying to guess whether sells are buys or buys are sells on the trading board. How mm's and ii's can seemingly manipulate the value of a company irrespective of its actual performance is simply beyond me. I thought the LSE was a heavily controlled investment medium.
We are owed announcements on the farm-in, FID and Harvey. the longer these take the more I am tempted to think that no news is not so good news. Delighted to be proved wrong but previous weakness in the sp has invariably been followed by negative news.

We need to be advised of completion of the farm-out and the findings on Harvey (now almost 5 weeks since well reached target depth, etc) soon. Hopefully, this will see the sp dig itself out of the current 20p rut it has been stuck in for some weeks and provide some concept of future performance.
Trying to make head or tail of the trading board is simply impossible - there is no way there can have been the volume of selling suggested over the past fortnight or so and the sp remaining level, if not rising.

T35, You are correct, in the short term, completion of the farm-in should have a positive impact on the sp. However, poor Harvey results will in my view diminish such gains as this is has been seen as one of the company's long term add-on projects. That said, if I had to choose between them, I would far rather have the farm-in agreement completed than positive Harvey results.
Is this perhaps a case of "no news is good news"!

Apologies, somehow posted before finished. They will want to be quite clear with these results as the numbers will have a significant influence on the sp. A delay in publishing could be positive or negative. My instinct is telling me that the data is not as promising as was hoped. However I would be delighted to be proved wrong.

As long as it takes them to analyse all the data ANA agree conclusions

The words "There’s good news flow coming up here..." was not lost on me. This could relate to various things, including Farm-in completion, core project FID, etc., but my take is that he is referring to the forthcoming Harvey results. This would explain the recent share purchases by RG and LO and the fact that the sp has remained level throughout a period of heavy selling.
So, has information on Harvey leaked? It can't be just wishful thinking - RG and LO are just too smart to invest on such a basis.
The discrepancy here is Burggraben's sales. I note butd's theory but perhaps Burggraben is simply seeking to create liquidity for something more rewarding.
The Harvey results are imminent. Will these be the watershed in terms of sp movement?

The lack of postings speaks volumes for the situation. About 7.25 million shares sold this morning and the sp rises. I have sought clarification from Burggraben on the reasons for its disposals but, surprise surprise, have heard nothing.
I do think the BoD should make some form of announcement, if only to reaffirm that the LOG disposal agreement remains in place and that all other matters continue to progress.

Interesting speculation about the varying possibilities at play at the moment. However, Irrespective of the farm-in not being completed, I believe that CalE/BH will not stand idly by in any prospective bid for IOG. As I have posted before, IOG - its assets, operator status and personnel - are a perfect fit for CalE, and BH has made it known directly and indirectly in the past that it is keen to build its o&g activities globally, specifically in the north sea. CalE's existing assets are either in the process of being wound down or in the early stages of assessment. It has no production and the core project timetable of first gas in 2021 offered through IOG (plus other fields) will be an enormous attraction to bid for the company. In that respect, any bid would be small change for BH.

Peakview, Thanks for the comments which are in all probability correct. Like you, I am also comfortable with the fundamentals and the derisking within IOG but still struggle to get my head around the control that the MM's and II's have on an sp, specifically in AIM.
I am beginning to comprehend that the reason some companies in this market fail is that they are simply unable to correct inaccuracies in their sp because of such manipulation, debilitating them from a business confidence and capital raising perspective. This is not about free movement of capital, etc., it is about investment firms controlling a market for their own gains, invariably at the expense of private investors. Is this legal?
Am I alone in this view?

So here we are where we were back in February, when Rockrose made its offer of 20p per share and was told to go away and behave. In the interim period, the entire core project and, indeed, the financial future of IOG, has been significantly derisked by the farm-in with CalE and the bond issue and Harvey has been drilled with our mishap. One could, therefore, logically think that the share price should be significantly higher than what it is, perhaps even edging 30p. But that is not the case and here we are, as intelligent investors, financiers, bankers and industrial people, all speculating wildly about what is actually going on.
The reality, it seems to me, lies with the MM's and large II's and their ability to control the price for their own purposes. Quite how this fits with LSE's ethos of providing a fair and just trading medium is simply beyond me. Frankly, given the fundamentals of IOG, its NAV and the derisking that has taken place, one has to seriously question if even the LSE is capable of perfecting its own markets.

A designated blue trade after a million reds! Do I take comfort from this or is it yet more false information on the system?
Its there really anyone among us who actually knows what is going on? "Shorts", "longs", 'Contracts for differences", Burggraben seemingly bailing and now spread betters now shareholders, etc, etc. Frankly, I don't have a clue except to know that the fundamentals of IOG remain in place and that we have BH behind the scenes. To quote ggits, exciting times ahead!

Hi Mole, I concur with your thoughts - this appears to be a good opportunity to buy stock given the derisked fundamentals of IOG at price which is simply not reflecting said fundamentals. However, I think if BH get a sniff of anything more than just profit-taking it will wield its mighty financial sword to protect its position, including making an offer for the company.