Member Info for Cherryhiller

Agree Greg, I just believe RN was deliberately misleading in his interviews

Thanks both

Seems structured to navigate failure. Not something I had heard RN mention before, last interview I saw he talked about how they were fundamentally designed for low gas prices,

Who are the operating subsidiaries that are not being placed into administration?

Yes Kistos has £247m net cash, current mcap &189m. Clearly massively undervalued

There is nothing to worry about as the business is ‘fundamentally design for low gas prices’, taken from RNs December interview with Malcy

Https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y2G6ff1fxLQ&pp=ygUHSW9nIGdhcw%3D%3D

Time stamp 13.48, we’ve fundamentally designed our business for low gas prices https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y2G6ff1fxLQ&pp=ygUHaW9nIHBsYw%3D%3D

Just trying to reconcile how a business that was fundamentally designed for low gas prices is now at going to breach covenants

Everything this bald cnt said in this interview has been a load of BS

Gas prices are now below what that were pre war in Ukraine.

I find it difficult to understand how governments could continue to enforce such punitive tax regimes if prices continue at pre-war levels.

Today’s news is hopefully the start of a raft of positive releases demonstrating just how cheap Serica is to the market.

MF stated, "we have an exciting investment programme of value-adding activities throughout 2023 and 2024 which has started with the Gannet GE-04 well being brought onto production".

Serica is likely trading on around 2.0x cash flow - need to wait till April results to confirm

If the results weren’t good prob all would have dropped c30 - 40%.

As it is, better than expected results c2% up.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y2G6ff1fxLQ&feature=youtu.be

In the Malcy interview, with respect to Southwark, RN literally states they are currently in the process of ‘stimulating that well ready for production and looking forward to bringing it on around year end’.

This is not an ‘expected’ statement, he has set investor expectations that the well will be delivered. Absolutely misleading as a few weeks later it has been suspended. Surely that cannot be acceptable as many investors will have bought in or held because of that statement of what will happen at around year end. It’s negligent and misleading.

It’s not about it being more difficult- they are literally not progressing with Southwark.

This is about negligence, incompetence and misleading shareholders into beliefs about delivery and then moving the goalposts like it’s still in an exploration stage

If you watch the interview with Marcy, RN states ‘we are currently in the process of stimulating that well ready for production and looking forward to bringing that on around year end.’

He then goes in to state, ‘As soon as we’ve done that, we’ll move back across to the other Southwark well and get that completed to the reservoir then look to get that on stream.’

He makes a number of clear statements about what they “will do” I.e. ‘bringing that on around year end’ and ‘as soon as we’ve done that’. His wording is absolutely negligent and misleading as there is no mention of the actual issues he subsequently cites in the RNS’.

He talks like in the Malay interview like it’s a matter of fact they will deliver Southwark, then we get an RNS stating they don’t know if the well can produce at commercial rates, then we get a today’s RNS stating Southwark won’t be moved into production.

He’s a disgrace and he clearly know F all.

That’s not how the expectation was framed - it wasn’t expect first gas along with water ingress.

I want to see some heavy director buying to out some confidence back into the market.

What I find frustrating is that as investors we are now talking about the need to understand the geology when only days ago we were told first gas was expected.

To make the statement of expecting first gas, the geology should be understood, if not such as statement is frivolous and negligent.

Quote from Rupert in the Dec RNS,

‘Importantly, we have made good progress at Southwark, with the A2 well expected onstream by mid-January. The A1 well is then expected to strengthen our production profile from early Q2. With Blythe H2 and the Kelham and Goddard appraisal wells to follow, 2023 is set to be a high-impact year for IOG.’

You cannot go from those words, to a few days later assessing the commercial viability of gas production from the same well, without the original statement being negligent and misleading.

Agree - RNS’ from the company as well market interviews on first gas from Southwark have been 100% misleading.

There has been clear guidance that first gas was to be expected mid-Jan. To shortly thereafter, inform the market that the Southwark Well may not be capable of producing gas at commercial rates, is wholly unacceptable. The messaging has been absolutely negligent - from first gas to possibly no gas at commercial rates.

And now IOG aren’t even sure that Southwark can produce gas at commercial rates. This is appalling misleading of shareholders.