Member Info for CaptainSwag

Slift - I wonder if the CPR company don't take the lead from Hur ? Ie did Hur give any sort of figure ?

If for example Hur said 10m barrels then you could expect erce to say we concur or actually think it is 5 or 15 etc..

Ngr - I have thought about this and as soon as trice left (SP 6p ISH). I would have said that the "geology" has gone Pete tong. We need a new well 8...and I would have used trices choice of position not through well 7. I would then tried to do a placing or open offer to shareholders . It would have been serious dilution but a lot better than the give away. The thing is after 9 months of trashing share and inaction how could you expect anyone to want to participate. The bond holders would not have been in their shoulders either.

Of course it might not have worked..but looking at the bod since September you cannot say they could have done things any worse than they actually did

slift - they should have estimated resources in my opinion. if they stated that in relation to the new OWC they now considered it was uncommercial (usual disclaimers) - i could have possibly accepted. but
"No resources are attributed by ERCE to the Halifax well"

sounds like they have written off everything to me. though interestingly the company have still not relinquished the licence - this was done immediately with other licences in the past

boris - as far as i understand it - hur have been collecting data throughout the last two years of production and they have used this data to re-evaluate their interpretation of the geology. they believe there is a massive downgrade and have sent the figures to ERCE who have more or less agreed with their conclusion. i suspect this is what happens in CPRs as a general - the company sends data off and third party says yes that's is possible - and then puts lots of disclaimers saying that it is based on figures provided , could turn out to be different and there is no responsibility whatsoever.

i am sure the data hur sent was spot on - their interpretation ? is it any more rock solid than the first CPR? who knows? would a new drill provide any data that would need the whole re evaluated again?

i did wonder why HUR were bothering with paying for a CPR if they were sure there was nothing left? i did wonder if this was the "proof" needed for a judge to rubber stamp the give away. yes the judge is shrewd but by his own admission he is not an oil expert and is never going to question an independent 3rd party official report. even it later turns out to be wrong as the first one was

i have always questioned the CPR process as i believe it is flawed. the company doing it are just going over figures supplied by the oil company involved and so must surely rarely disagree with what they are supplied with. the number of disclaimers and therefore lack of responsibility says volume to me. i also suspect it is in the interest of the cpr company to give the cpr wanted - eg usually theres billions of oil - in order to secure future work. bit like getting an mot / gas safety cert - do you go to the one who is going to pick holes in everything or take a more "pragmatic" view

i certainly would question how the new cpr could completely dismiss the previous data on halifax as residue and now apparently there is absolutely nothing there? without any further drilling?

would be fantastic if it happens black bag. All we need is that ODX don't try to "run themselves out" as usual. no stupid tweets or negative rns

"My question to you is what are they doing in the factory at the moment."

How about you tell us what they are doing?

"All we are seeing here is City games post ISA cash inflows and an extended news void end of April."

it is now almost june! no games the company destroyed its own sentiment. some people have had enough and sold. some others sold at profit. some others sold high buy in again low

sng - does not destroy its own SP. actually come to think of it - i dont know any other company that does it?...BIG THINGS...LOL

colin cant sell a test in the middle of a pandemic king - however does a good rns and tweet!

yep that tesla tweet really did the trick - guy needs firing

kama - it is questionable how many in the industry are paying close attention to the comings and goings of hur. if they are successful with the giveaway no one will probably ever know what went on.
i dont see this bod as willingly falling on their swords.

british - they are certainly trying to keep their jobs. if the giveaway is successful they will be presumably guaranteed 1-3 years min. EGM and they are toast and they know it.
they need to be forced to give egm before too late.

freddie "they cannot be good at everything"

just need them to be good at manufacturing and selling...ermmmm.. well?
also not to lose me money with disrespectful tweets or poor rns..

still trying to find out what they are good at

Really? the only "big" thing i have seen is the drop in SP - due to ODX themselves!

HH - good post. kerogen would seem not to be bondholders - as it seems they were then contacted at the same time as CA - the "cross wall " or whatever it was called.. However not knowing who the bondholders are does not allow one to investigate and rule out that there are any links. the timing could of course be entirely coincidental but i did find it strange that with new plans being supposedly being formulated that this was the time they chose to give up their seat bearing in mind their relatively large % stake in the company. it seemed counterintuitive unless there was going to be a conflict of interests

thanks for the"oilie" replies!
if that is the case and the bod were wrong in stating a weather window it might be a good idea to have examples of similar drills in the area during those times eg the 2016 dates and description. it would certainly question their ability

awk - i was there too. and it was a very good learning experience. i personally would rather come across as the bondholder lawyer (succinct with relevant data when asked) than the hur lawyer who when examined often had no answer or facts and attempted to get himself out of his hole by rambling. the judge seemed a shrewd cookie

heid /awk - would an exploration drill require different weather/ calm seas to a production well?

senseman - i agree with you the oil future predictions are not how i see the oil price. However again when arguing against it i feel that there is more mileage in the fact that it is in reality "just a guess" (as in no one would have expected corona two years ago) as opposed to the bod is being crooked.

the judge was very shrewd in this aspect anyway - he stated that the picture can change very quickly on a number of parameters.

I just think that attacking the integrity of the company to the judge rather than facts is not going to win him over. he is shrewd and without concrete proof he would not be able to take it into account and the danger is it looks like an emotional reaction rather than reasoned

awk - the thing is that if you are going to argue in a court i think there is more to be gained by using the specific info that hur come up with and use it against them. i have no idea if the drilling plans that they were considering require a weather window or not. if you then bring this up as a counter argument you then need to be able to prove it. if they argue that the increased risk and cost were not worth it on assessment - do we have a strong enough counter argument?

they have repeatedly mentioned the weather window - and so i think we should use it to our advantage. they had a deadline - they knew it and said plans would be formalised by xmas - and they weren't. why not? without formal plans how could they hope to get finance? their missing the window put us in this position. was it negligence? that is possibly a stronger argument. one to be used for their removal perhaps?

the lincoln drilling in 2019 was finished at the end of november - so before the start of the winter season. therefore this is not evidence. I do not remember which months the 2016/17 campaign was undertaken . if it were similar type of work then maybe it could be used as evidence to dispel the weather window argument . if needed

british - good post and very much as I see it.
I suspect the remaining bod without trice were out of their depth. they disagreed with his "geology" but were unable to decide a plan or get funds. Whatever one says a bout trice's old guard they could get funding and a project off the ground. i feel the bod left were possibly just turn up and collect wage merchants. Anthony Maris was probably good on paper but a poor choice - it is his first time as ceo and i havent been impressed.

i feel their lack of action led to missing the weather window - whether through inability or something else. the talks with committee and stakeholder led to an easier route and guarantee of wages for a couple more years as a minimum. at no point were they seemingly interested in shareholders. there has not been any media/interviews (as far as i am aware) since trice left to introduce the ceo or explain his vision for the future etc