Member Info for bots

Thanks for your concern BV. I’m not underwater and this is the only speculative high risk investment. Everything else is wrapped in boring diversified funds.

I miss the adrenaline rush.

Tempting to filter, but anyone who’s had their head handed to them by the market (I have more than once) will understand the bitterness.

Since I’m new here I’m really not interested in what happened under Parsons and co, SOU is essentially a new company starting out with a proven CEO in Majid Shafiq. I have a 2% portfolio position, ideal for a speculative dabble. ;-)

What a lot of nonsense.

I put this into an AI and asked what it thought about the claims: I quote here:

"There is absolutely no public evidence, regulatory disclosure, or legal tracking to support the allegation that the Board of Directors or the Moroccan government/entities participated in "back handers" or bribery. The disposal of the Moroccan assets to Managem for US$57 million was positioned by the board as the only viable mechanism to clear the company's mounting structural debts and avoid insolvency, rather than a malicious attempt to "sell equity holders down the river.""

I know of cases where investor have been taken to court for libel over comments made on BBs. Who would want to have a legal bill the size of a house as well as taking an investment loss? Having said that, I've been in the same situation as historical investors losing my shirt as a price goes south. I agree it hurts.

I think many investors will wait for the Tendrara sale vote (GM 16th June) before speculating. This is classic investor behaviour in the circumstances; "why invest when there's a risk I don't have to take?" Assuming the vote carries the share price will often stay flat or dip a little as pro-Tendrara investors are finally flushed (I suspect most have gone), and from that point forwards the company is essentially a 'tabula rasa' waiting for news on deals. One thing that could pop the share price up would be a nice RNS saying that the company have broken ground on Tayra. Second if the company state that the Tayra development nullifies Aim Rule 15. If Tayra is consider to be a qualifying operating business then SOU is removed from cash shell status and the requirement to secure a M&A deal within 6 months (pending suspension from AIM) is removed. Majid hints at this but not set in stone. Either of these announcements, which could come at any time around now, would see the share price pop IMO. Thus I've taken the plunge early.

One of the reasons I'm here is because I follow good directors - Majid was excellent at i3e. You can tell from the Q&A he tells the truth - there's no hyperbole or over-optimism, he just tells it how it is. His comment about the board being deeply experienced and extremely well connected in the industry was possibly overlooked by most - but he's absolutely right. He is the ideal man for precisely this situation. So I'm taking a speculative bet on the board delivering, my edge is that I know what Majid can do (most don't) - I hope he can pull this out of the bag again; but accept a bit of volatility along the way.

From the Q&A, I like Majid’s confidence in finding a M&A deal. I used to own i3e just before Majid bought some excellent O&G properties in Canada. They were literally company making and I made a fortune as the shares streaked upwards. Since I3e was taken over I’ve retired, so I’ve moved to income funds but still have a play portfolio and now have a small but ‘potentially’ meaningful position in SOU. What I’m betting on is an I3e.2.0. If anyone can do it MS can.

My worries about the AIM Rule 15 have diminished - it’s possible that Tayra, which should be being set up now, will move SOU out of its shell status. Not a foregone conclusion though.

Pinguser5,

I’m new here, so following your post, I asked Claude(AI) if Parsons had anything to do with SOU. The reply as follows:-

He’s now CEO of Forgent. He departed Sound Energy under a cloud, with 179 shareholders writing to demand his sacking, with critics labelling him a “shameless ramper.”

Claude then went on to quote your post below verbatim.

😂😂

If the sale deal completes the company has 6 months to find a qualifying asset to buy with O&G prices sky high and just $11m to spend - otherwise it’s a suspension and goodnight Vienna.

SOU could be up a certain creek without a particular wooden implement.

Discovered these following a PensionCraft interview with a Ruffer manager - you can find it on youtube. Backed the truck up and will be loading more later. - possibly mix a bit of Capital Gearing (CGT) for good measure. Feet up and chill with a beer.

Goes Ex Divi soon too.

Sold out today with a £76k profit after holding, slicing, and reinvesting for the last 18 months.

I won’t be retuning but then I’ve never been unhappy with HBR - I think they’ll do well.

It’s just I now have enough for my retirement and simply don’t need the worry or the risk.

For info, I sold over 200k shares very easily in two chunks at a reasonable price; so there’s accumulation out there. Suggests you folks will have a good week - hope so.

Regards Bots

Sounds obvious, but Greenland isn’t a military issue. The US already dominate militarily in Greenland. Instead, this is a UN recognition thing, and some key players are not supporting Trumps whims (e.g. UK, France, Finland etc) and are being punished with Tariffs. It won’t change the fact that regardless whether Trump invades Greenland, builds a golf course or what; the US has no legal or sovereign claim on Greenland. UN therefore unlikely to accept any change. It would set a dangerous precedent.

Meanwhile the rest of the world is starting to form a trading block based around China that excludes the US. Soft power is draining away from the US and the money with it. Trump is slowly wrecking the US and smirking as though he’s doing some great thing.

He can have all the credit in a few years when they fall off a cliff.

It’s a nothingburger. A bit of volitility early doors and things will settle IMO.

S&P & FTSE futures are unmoved.

I listen to a podcast called "On the Tape" with Danny Moses of "The Big Short" fame. I recommend it because it's like being a fly on the wall of a Merrill Lynch trading floor. Anyway, on the latest podcast Danny notes that the recent dive in oil prices hardly impacted the big producers. According to Danny, this is because the oil sector is "washed out of sellers" and buyers are rotating in. He predicts that if oil goes to $70, some of these companies will be up 40-50% in no time.

Just saying -

Equity prices can be irrational on the downside; like 150p of absurdly cheap for Harbour and ‘surprise- surprise’ it didn’t stay there long. No reason why 150p can’t happen again, but then I think people are waking up to the story here and momentum is beginning to build. So I’m looking forward to the price being irrational on the UPSIDE.

I think Trump has signalled too much. Iran leadership have started sleeping in different beds in case a bomb lands on them. Trump is trying to make them complacent again.

Q. What will cause a re-rating?

A. An end of year profit - simples.

For example in 2024 Harbour Energy printed a $93 million loss after tax, a reversal from the prior year's profit (yes, I know, UK EPL blar blar). But with that print (which was hinted at in last years gloomy trading statement) I would imagine several institutions exited; not because they lacked faith, but because their investment covenant forbid them from owning a non-profitable company. For example, the day before last years statement the shareprice was 291p, nine trading days later it was 227p (down 22%).

What's interesting, in the last few weeks, volume has started to pick up suggesting institutions are positioning ahead of a more positive trading statement and expected full year profit. Print a profit and institutional buyers will return.

All IMHO.

Harbour is operator on:

- PL211ES

- PL211FS

- PL475ES

- PL248MS

These are all suffix extensions of existing, mature licences. That tells us several important things:

1. These are not frontier bets — they’re near‑infrastructure, low‑risk options

APA suffixes (E, F, M, S etc.) almost always represent:

- Additional blocks adjacent to existing acreage

- Re‑evaluation of known reservoir trends

- Tight‑reservoir or stratigraphic upside

- Potential tie‑back candidates to existing hubs

This is exactly the type of exploration Harbour excels at.

2. Operatorship = Norway trusts Harbour with real work

Norway only awards operatorship when a company:

- Has strong subsurface capability

- Has a credible plan for near‑term activity

- Has financial strength to execute wells and developments

Harbour getting four operatorships is a meaningful endorsement.

3. These licences likely sit near infrastructure Harbour already partners in

PL211 and PL248 are in the North Sea, in areas with:

- Existing pipelines

- Existing platforms

- Proven petroleum systems

- Short cycle times

This is where Harbour can turn small discoveries into profitable tie‑backs.

What the partnership licences imply

Harbour is partner in:

- PL1306

- PL1304

- PL1300

- PL1299

-PL1289S — APA suffix

These are newer-numbered licences, meaning:

- They are new APA acreage, not extensions

- They are likely in areas where Harbour wants optionality but not operatorship

- They may be in regions where Aker BP, Equinor, or DNO are operator

This is still strategically valuable:

- Harbour gets exposure to upside

- Without committing to operatorship capex

- While building relationships with key Norwegian operators

Overall:

This is a high‑quality set of awards for a company like Harbour.

It strengthens their Norwegian footprint exactly where they want it:

low‑risk, infrastructure‑led, high‑return exploration.

16% of all licences.

For a mid‑cap, that’s a strong showing.

1. Operatorships = strategic trust + control

Being awarded 4 operatorships is the real headline.

Norway does not hand operatorship to companies it doesn’t trust technically, financially, and organisationally.

Operatorship gives Harbour:

- Control over drilling pace

- Control over capex timing

- Control over development concept

- A larger share of value if discoveries are commercial

This is especially important for a company rebuilding its portfolio after the UK windfall tax era.

APA acreage is low‑risk, near‑infrastructure

APA (Awards in Pre‑defined Areas) is not frontier exploration. It’s:

- Close to existing platforms

- Lower cost

- Faster to commercialisation

- Often tied to known reservoir trends

For Harbour, this is the sweet spot:

small‑to‑medium discoveries that can be tied back cheaply and quickly.

Prior to the US embargo, Venezuela was exporting 1m barrels per day. With billions invested in Venezuelas infrastructure that could increase to 3m barrels over the next 5 years. US companies will be relying on Govt to pay for infrastructure improvements using proceeds from Oil stolen by the US. A slow process with plenty of skimming on every transaction. I personally can’t see the point; the US has enough oil of its own. Once Trump is out of office the grandstanding surrounding this will be forgotten. I doubt Venezuela will ever produce significantly more oil.. This whole affair is more about denying China sanctioned oil.

Re: further acquisitions.

Periods of low global oil demand often lead to industry consolidation as weaker companies begin to struggle. Add to this we are at the bottom of the annual energy cycle (Jan/Feb), though not a precise science, and here we are acquiring Waldorf and LLOG. I think that’s enough without pushing the debt boat out, but who knows.