The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
08.52
To clarify, my post was aimed at both sides of this sordid debate (apologies for defaming the word).
You see, it's not all about you.................
For what it's worth , I agree with a balanced argument, just not the extraordinarily tedious repetition several times a day.
You may be in danger of breaking a nail?
You may be pleased with yourselves in the point scoring stakes, but you are doing no favours to either business, nor, most importantly their shareholders. It's all about self-importance.
Please button it for the sake of the very significant and mainly silent majority.
We had the old one pint, two straws debate some years ago whilst considering shared reservoirs across a common boundary and we're clear that there will need to be an equitable agreement as to how that resource is shared. Regulators will make those determinations, thus avoiding 'obfuscation' and 'cruel spin' and 'approbrium'.
I'll accept that it is not a 'fight' between shareholders (I called it a 'pi..ing contest') when you, for one, take a step down off your soap box. We all get data, maths, probability, etc. - let's face it with you banging on, how could we not?!
...........oil flow from common horizons only a few hundred metres from our licence boundary. what is not to like?
this ****ing contest for no good reason is becoming tiresome.
congratulate 88e and take all of the good news coming out of it for our own benefit in the better part of those same reservoir horizons within our own acreage.
11.21
Olderwiser,
I think we're all on the same page when it comes to the asset value and its potential. Both are fantastic and every RNS appears to be adding to that - wonderful!
I wholly agree with Seahawk though, that the missing element is securing the funds to get the stuff out of the ground; here we have a circular argument. We need more funds to do some more work in the short term to convince those who may ultimately be interested in backing the company, or buying it, to invest. So we need it now.
We now have gas an a 'potential' further revenue stream - one which was, hitherto a liability but now may 'potentially' add value. Again, all fantastic 'potential' - that word again.
The only way to turn that word into income is in capital invested, wheresoever it comes from and in whatever form, equity or debt. For the latter, and back to the circle, we need proof of the ability to get the stuff out of the ground and we need equity to leverage the debt.
I know this, to you and to most, will be statement of the blindingly obvious and I don't mean to demean, but it's a huge frustration - not just the 'get rich quick brigade'.
Hopefully, the business will soon find the investor. It needs to if it is not to lose credibility in its extending fundraising timeline.
Keep believing in the tooth fairy and the fairy godmother!
Here for the long term as a LTH.
Good luck.
cb
For clarity, at circa 6'13" of the presentation DH refers to ongoing discussions on "vendor financing" with "one large contractor". In Q&A he later states, at 44'24", that they've narrowed discussions down from two parties to one party. Any reference to the potential to go back to others is fiction.
.........as I said after the 28 March RNS. Yesterday's was a fantastic resource upgrade, but it's all about getting the oil out of the ground. The question on further prove-up drilling was answered with the usual caveat from Jay - " subject to funding".
We now have Helium(another gas) to add into the mix alongside 'ordinary' gas. What next? I'm in the camp which questions gas pipeline deliverability and hence its use as a funding catalyst, but I hope I'm proved wrong.
I implore the company to concentrate on the core activity.
We're now appear to be down to a list of one partner in negotiation as a potential funding partner - let's hope that deal comes off.
It's all about funding, funding, funding.
Good luck all.
cb
SG22,
Can't think that your post is other than a little dig or wind-up but I agree that we will be watching the results from 88e. On balance I think they'll prove what they hope for and that will be good for 88eand PANR alike.
One pint, two straws.
Good luck
cb
I hope that what we can agree on is that we own everything that can sensibly developed to the east of Ahpun, where the Sag river at the surface becomes a potentially costly barrier to development and to the west of Kodiak where, beyond our new boundary, there is no oil.
Happy?
Scott,
Go back to the webinar and listen around 9-10 minutes. Bob tells us that at and beyond our western and northwestern boundary the strata runs out. 10.06' "we have a dramatic thinning of the reservoir". They confirm that beyond our western boundary the wells were dry. eg Wolfbutton.
This is at the edge of the deltaic margin where water will have reduced in depth and deposition will naturally have lessened.
And so, no, your explanation does not make sense. To re-state, we own everything meaningful to the west.