Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
Desperately disappointing.
Clearly no interest from farmout partners at acceptable levels - the only interest being at levels similar to current market SP levels, but also taking a large proportion of the company. Always happy not to be diluted, but this will take a very long time to deliver under the company's own steam, particularly with a value target of $5-$10 per barrel.
The strategy timeline is being kicked a long way down the road - 2025-2028 and it has to be said that this will be with a fair wind.
No real explanation of how the £350m capex requirement is going to be funded.
New kids on the block but not impressed with either of them. The Brit doesn't do it for me - and I'm a Brit.
What happened to Bob? He was the technical guru who gave me confidence.
Some detailed and complex slides with precious little explanation.
As I said, desperately disappointing.
Happy to hear reasoned objective views which may differ.
cb
14.49
Red,
" See what you think"
I think, it is written by a shareholder - therefore hardly going to be negative.
States that they are giving "extreme upside cases" - beware!
States that comparative examples are "in completely different rocks to 88e" - what does that matter? Rock's rock, yeah??
They say that it is their "Big Bet" - as in bets on a Roulette Wheel?
They also say, "Success will require a significant amount of luck. There is no guarantee that our Big Bet will ever come true."
I sincerely hope that 88e comes off, but what is being quoted here appears to ignore the inherent health warnings and qualifications writ large in the paper.
I think we are plumbing new depths here not least in terms of what i can only perceive to be a managed undermining of the share price but also on this board.
Unsubstantiated accusations a plenty with two very vocal schools of thought.
One, a group of newby wannabees talking it down with feign knowledge and understanding small cap explorers, apparently devoid of a historical knowledge any understanding of geology but clearly with an agenda. Where did you come from and why now? As if we didn't know!
Two, the old stager(s), keen to justify every single point of disagreement and every point of geological fact with a view that we should be wallowing in 'fundamentals' financial heaven. Bring it on!
You may have gathered that I err in the direction of the latter rather than the former.
However, I'm getting equally ****ed off with both camps as this debate (the word may be unworthy of this forum) has degenerated into a complete shambles.
12.46
DYOR
But just to assist you - I'm not sure why, as you clearly are not competent to research it yourself - have a look at the Webinar Investor Presentation of January 2022. You might care to scroll through to approximately 1 hr 13 minutes.
Louis10,
You are clearly not invested and so perhaps you might explain to us all what you are doing here. If it's to save us all from ourselves, please don't bother as we're all grown ups, can read and can make decisions for ourselves. Perhaps others less able to make up their own minds, somewhere else in the world, might benefit from your guidance and wisdom?
Please take that as a polite invitation to vacate this space.
Yes, they did front up with the interview and they appear a little exasperated at the market and shareholders reactions, understandably, in my opinion. They are disappointed with their own results in the last few days/weeks and are formulating a plan moving forward and the SMD test now makes sense on a reduced-cost basis.
We would all have liked a different result but this shows that if you are here, or in any other exploration company for a quick 'get rich quick fix', you are more than likely in the wrong place. IMHO the negative reaction is more to do with the get rich quick mentality than simply being disappointed that the result didn't quite meet expectations. It is still 500 barrels per day of Alaska crude (note they say this is inclusive of the full spectrum of constituents - they don't differentiate as many of the uneducated here wish to do).
It's all about location geology and getting a full understanding of this to enable a refinement of the methodology(ies) for efficient extraction.
Two final points - firstly, there are plans afoot for the next stages in Alkaid 1 and/or 2 and, secondly, a reaffirmation that this well represents only 4% of the resource in PANRs acreage.