Member Info for cbaron

Disappointing that there's not much new here post the 27 Sept presentation, save for what we know from this morning's RNS.

I agree with the comments on the timeline but they do seem to be connecting the anticipated timeline for the well production with the regulatory and construction process for the connection to TAPS - little point in one being ahead of the other. As a programme (being used to detailed construction and development programmes in the property industry linking land acquisition/financing/procurement/build/commission/handover) it does appear somewhat vague.

As to your instinct of things 'bubbling along under the surface', I'm not seeing it. What do you base your view on?

Lots going on today, but as noted earlier, we need to see more detail on next steps. Where next and when, as there remains lots more exploratory work and proving still to do?

12.36

I'm not sure what I have to apologise for as I did not question your motives.

I may have questioned your ability to read words and correctly interpret them, hence I requoted extracts from RNSs by cutting and pasting rather than guessing what they may have said.

Having re-read my last post, I ought to have highlighted the following words from today's RNS:

"....the actual flow rates were substantially better than prognosed...."

So what's the beef with flow rates???!!! Another result!

To assist our argumentative friends, here's a relevant extract from today's RNS - it comes in the paragraph after the statements of results about the KEY objectives, and reads:

"As highlighted before the operation, the flow rates themselves were not expected to be material because the objective was to limit drawdown in the initial flow back. However, the actual flow rates were substantially better than prognosed, given the conservative approach to production in order to limit gas flashing in the reservoir and ensure the best quality PVT samples, which bodes well for future SMD development in the Ahpun Field."

It beggars belief that folks here cannot read and then start to make things up.

The RNS dated 27 September 2023 states:

"The objective of the operations at Alkaid-2 is NOT to target maximum flow rates. Pantheon will deliberately restrict the flow rates to minimise gas production into the well bore and allow optimum data collection." (I've added the capitals for emphasis)

Why therefore are some people now seemingly trying to add flow rates back in as a headline key target and THEN expressing disappointment??!! IT WAS NEVER A KEY TARGET.

As Peakybrum points out at let's rejoice at the greater than expected frac efficiency. Result!

Great news this morning on the road to building commerciality.

No getting carried away, but it would be good to extrapolate that frack to commercial levels and look what the impacts are on value.

Reaffirmation that the investment required is at sensible levels and that the goal is to protect investors from unacceptable dilution.

No surprise that the SP has not catapulted too far. For further sustained growth in the SP, I suspect we need a few more building blocks in place. Further news on the next stage in the development plan will be helpful in that regard.

I commend the 4 September interview to all investors and all interested in PANR.

Irrespective of some weasel words here which seemingly seek to question the asset, David Hobbs states, in relation to the Netherland & Sewell Independent Report on Kodiak, that it contains "About a billion barrels of recoverable marketable liquids classifying them as contingent resources"

No lies, no qualifications, no weasel words.

cb

Littledog,

For fear of your or anyone else being misled by the flow rates quoted at 11.30, you may wish to review the RNS dated 6 March 2023.

This is an extract.

"The Alkaid #2 well returned to production on 21 February, following the cleanout of the sand blockage in the final 1,000ft (c.20%) of the wellbore. The IP30 production rate is calculated at c.505 barrels per day ("BPD") of liquid hydrocarbons consisting of c.180 BOPD oil, c.325 BPD of condensate and natural gas liquids ("NGLs"), along with c.2,300 mcfpd natural gas, after shrinkage. The quantum of liquid and gas production flowing without artificial lift from Alkaid #2 demonstrates the good deliverability of the reservoir, which is a significant de-risking event for Alkaid development. When separated and sold, condensate and NGLs are estimated to achieve 80% - 90%, or potentially higher, of ANS crude oil price (ANS crude typically trades at a premium to WTI oil). Post cleanout, flow rates were initially marginally higher than pre-cleanout suggesting that despite the sand blockage the final 1,000ft was connected and already contributing to the main wellbore through the fractures communicating with each other. Alkaid #2 also penetrated the shallower shelf margin deltaic ("SMD") reservoir, which management estimate to contain over 400 million barrels of oil ("mmbo") recoverable resource. The addition of these resources to any potential Alkaid development will significantly boost economic returns. The data collected indicates the SMD has significantly better reservoir qualities than the Alkaid anomaly."

The hydrocarbon flow rate was 5x that quoted at 11.30 albeit with a small discount to take into account the condensate and NGLs.

I hope this helps.

17.19

Perhaps you should.........."give up"..........as all you've done is provoke your pal to respond to your next thread.

You've gotta larf 😂

I've been torn for a while on how to handle the agent provocateur.

Try to reason and seek justification for the arguments/untruths put forward and nothing comes back. Challenge and abuse receive, perhaps understandably, a like response.

I conclude that to ignore is the best policy and keep on posting on subjects that matter in further proving the asset base of the company.

Rab et al,

A very interesting debate.

I think we have been programmed into well flow as being the only parameter which denotes success or failure of a well and there is likely to be an expectation that, even if not published for us all to devour, ramp or criticise, it is clearly a factor you'd expect ultimate partners/farm-out/purchasers to want to know.

I suspect that even though the company is keeping a lid on it, there will, through the vast experience within the team, a very accurate view on what the flow is, tested or not.

I think for reasons stated earlier, it is sensible not to set an expectation which may not be achieved with the inevitable disappointment and potentially negative SP impacts which may follow - not to mention more ammunition (rightly or wrongly) for the naysayers.

19.01

No, please don't stop posting on my account. I accept your explanation.

Let's move on.

Good luck.

cb

18.14

Consistently inconsistent! Click on your name and it says you joined LSE in March 2020. So you must have changed your identity ,if as you say, you were on here 24/7 up until 2020. Who were you previously one wonders?

Not trolling, if that's what you're insinuating, but when you start putting people down as being a newbie (trolling?), you need to get your facts straight.

Agree Blackadder. Many thanks 3stands - interesting to see something informative that explains how we achieve a key goal that may ultimately make a difference.

Flocking rockets certainly won't 😂

15.55

"Just looked back through your posts and your new here" - says the man who first posted on PANR on 1 Sep 2023

You gotta laugh!!!

It's hoped that the mangrove re-adjustment will be a positive influence but be careful about JS's "rocket" expectation as there are many in profit at these levels and a little above who may well take profits and sell into the rise.

Blackadder,

Intriguing - care to elucidate?

Olderwiser,

Thank you for your informed input. All makes practical sense to a 'non-oiler' given the desire to limit the production of gas in the current test.

It's nice to see an input on the stages of development of the extraction strategy which will lead to proving up the assets of the company and the critical means to the ends everyone hopes will be a successful outcome.

11.08

Good afternoon Sprout45. There are 919 million shares in issue and its difficult to imagine that more than a tiny fraction of those holders read and/or are influenced by what is said here and other similar places. The impact of any toxicity is negligible, save for the potential effect on the blood pressure of those rising to the bait. Continuing to give oxygen to the disruptor(s) is mistake, though one easily made in the heat of the moment. The fundamentals have not changed and we should remember that at all times.

11.29

"we are getting sidetracked" - Brian, I completely agree with you. There you go, I've said it ;-)

11.50 & 12.01

A meaningful investor and a cogent business planner ought to give confidence. These people are not around merely to massage their own egos when they have invested their hard earned cash on the one hand and their cash and career on the other.

I look forward to the results of the tests. Hopefully, another step to proving the plan.

19.07

That's what the Stock Exchange TR1 document states. To say the SP dropped as a result, when it had been on a downward trend all day and the RNS can only have affected the last half hour of trading, is clutching at straws.

Hardly a ramp, merely a fact as confirmed by an official document.

17.40

Not surprising that you sound surprised as you were clearly winging it when you posted. You hadn't done the calculation. We're still waiting for your 'economics' calculation.

The facts of the RNS are that Michael Spencer has increased his holding and therefore confidence in PANR.