Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video here.
Does anyone know the terms of the convertible bond that's referred to in the q3 presentation? Cheers
"Baghdad’s recent 200bn IQD transfer to Erbil was a one-time payment rather than the start of monthly disbursements, according to multiple officials on both sides. Political and technical disputes are still blocking the KRG budget share."
https://twitter.com/berendvh/status/1421325442041237505?s=21
Looks like T W has shared about prd on Twitter ?
"Letter to @theFCA – Ron Pilbeam and Predator Oil & Gas: how can this possibly be legit? #PRD"
https://twitter.com/tomwinnifrith/status/1418111661924397056?s=21
"ignored what was being spouted on the BB and went away and thought about it for a few hours in a rational manner"
A more rational manner would be to imagine not having any holding currently - and knowing what you know today given the recent RNS' and today's big RNS, would you buy at the current price with so much uncertainty and potential loss of trust by the market participants? A lot of PIs who were going to be would be buyers suddenly would step back seeing director sales?
On one side, Mou-1 is a success, while on another, the second most important guy at prd sells out majority of his holding? Did RP think Mou-1 was the best shot and doesn't look at it like Guercif has anything else to drill for, but PG disagrees?
As some have mentioned before, microcap E&Ps should be dealt with a healthy dose of skepticism, and on a risk- reward basis - not just on a reward basis, as has been analyzed on here time and time again by many posters.
" The sheep spends its life worried about the wolf, only to be eaten by the farmer." - Alex Finlay
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
Spawny - from todays RNS it seems that MOU-1 drill was always to investigate prospectivity of MOU-4 which obviously is a big surprise to the ones who've been paying attention regarding MOU-1s main objective for a commercial discovery. All the operational update info in todays RNS seems to be just add on for the main event of placing /raise.
Given that positives of the RNS, if any, have been covered on the bb already, the bit that stood out most imo is lack of confirmation of MOU-4 fully funded and if it will happen in q4 given that MOU-4 target location is not covered by fhd current EIA. How long would the EIA for MOU-4 take?
Most importantly, did anyone consider, if MOU-4 was always the main target and MOU-1 was just derisking MOU-4 - why wasn't MOU-4 included as part of the EIA for MOU-1? If MOU-4 is your main target why would you have an EIA only for MOU-1 or is the location for MOU-4 decided after MOU-1 results? More questions than answers...
Didn't understand the bit about prd looking to complete a well for gas production in "another basin"? Is this a hedge against Guercif not panning out? This looks more and more like a strategy of sdx regarding going after small wells for some revenues? And this fund raise was just for the next 4-5 months and doesn't seem like for mou4. This raise seems more for mou1 post drill costs and seeing what else they could test and get more data. Not sure how you test or appraise gas shows instead of a gas discovery - seems MOU-4 is appraisal for Mou-1 as it seems Mou-1 was an appraisal for Grf-1?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
P.s. Re Anchois discovery - if I recall correctly Repsol had termed the discovery "sub-commercial" and I think it's the same one that char is looking to drill again. All depends on commerciality of any discovery.
https://www.mees.com/2021/3/5/geopolitical-risk/repsol-shell-leave-morocco-repsol-quits-iraqi-kurdistan/f0317400-7dbc-11eb-9a0a-0f3f8dcdac5e
All IMO dyor
Zebra "Anyone who thought we'd flow/sell gas from Mou1 needs to do more research."
RNS of 18 March 2021 says;
"In accordance with the Company's strategy to fast-track monetisation of an initial potential gas discovery at MOU-1 for the Moroccan industrial market, SLR Consulting Ltd, petroleum engineers and oil and gas advisors, were commissioned to develop a high level scheme for the transport of dry gas from the Guercif well site to existing reception facilities via a CNG "virtual pipeline"."
Positives and negatives should be balanced - no use being blindly positive or negative . And reading company RNS' alone is not research imo, with micro caps it's all about joining dots whether positive or negative so as to avoid round tripping and giving up huge gains. Strangely, we tend to not research when the sp is going up, but research the S out of it when sp is going down due to fear.
Nothing changes sentiment like price - Never seen so many posters including some technical/traders researching into the company fundamentals on this bb?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
Not a geology expert but my guess is that the origin of the gas might not be where MOU-1 was but still in prospective area so maybe that adjusted the prospectivity along with the additional data? CPR is just an estimate - unless drill bit proves a source that's commercial doesn't matter what's estimated.
Despite what might have been said, I'm positive prd hence the reason to post here. Just not blindly positive. I suppose like the rest of the market waiting to read the forward plans and next steps for drill.
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
The buying power across the pond is very powerful so would defy logic when compared to other E&Ps with market cap above £400 mn.
All IMO dyor
Imo MOU-1 was supposed to hit a gas discovery/origin rather than gas shows which points to another origin (MOU-4 etc.).
As with any drill it's not a surprise regarding the sp performance after a missed drill target even though it might give more info regarding the next possible target. If one has been paying attention, the upside and downside to sp was pretty clear to holders holding through the drill on a hit or miss basis imo, if MOU-1 had hit the sp would be 20p+ while on a missed target, it would have been what we've seen.
What has changed in addition to the result of the drill and it's communication form is the possibility of another couple of drills which might need funding. With more than 50% of free float changing hands in a week or so means the marginal buyer is not going to be the same as it was during the last pre drill run up from 4p to 20p levels imo given the disappointment of Mou-1. So potentially market might be a lot more sceptical of the next drill and run up might not be as exciting as it was going into Mou-1 due to the very very very confident management assessment of the Mou-1 drill. Of course there might be a run up into any raise as we have seen during the last two capital raises. But IMO from the price action and at £17 mn market cap it seems buyers would wait until funding and drill plan /date is clear as any raise would be at a decent discount.
Has MOU-4 CoS been estimated by SLR yet during its inclusion in the updated cpr earlier in the year?
All imo and could be wrong so always dyor
Personally have lost more because of these microcap bbs where ramping away from reality gets you to keep holding on even after change in the investment thesis, compared to the upside lost due to derampers so called fud. Prd will be interesting but only after there's funding visibility and once forward drill plans are laid out in an interview by PG rather than an Rns given the obfuscation that can happen with words imo.
One of the best advice I came across which fits well with the market was;
"Don't ever panic.
.
.
.
But if you have to panic, panic first."
P.s. Enjoying tea with diamond hands can get difficult.
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
The Twitter poster with more than 13k followers across the pond seem to have generated a lot of interest in $panr. So panr might defy gravity in comparison to other UK listed E&Ps.
All IMO dyor
This is what happens when you blindly trust numbers posted on a bb without dyor. There is nothing on page 19 of the Annual Report that the poster suggested regarding incoming revenues. It's all estimated just like revenues were estimated from the Scoping study for MOU-1. Can anyone see any revenues coming in on the income statement or cash flow statement? If prd was currently revenue generating and self funding that would be mentioned front and center in at least one of the RNS'?
Surprised none of the well researched posters corrected that?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
JB- most questions regarding MOU-1 objectives and whether it has "succeeded" can be found from the RNS of 18 March 2021.
And re the $1mn deposit return - I think it can only be returned to prd in case of a commercial discovery (need to double check this)
Excerpts from the RNS regarding MOU-1 well
"In accordance with the Company's strategy to fast-track monetisation of an initial potential gas discovery at MOU-1 for the Moroccan industrial market, SLR Consulting Ltd, petroleum engineers and oil and gas advisors, were commissioned to develop a high level scheme for the transport of dry gas from the Guercif well site to existing reception facilities via a CNG "virtual pipeline".
"Undiscounted net-back, excluding the drilling of an additional development well assuming MOU-1 is potentially completed as a production well"
"Scoping annual gross undiscounted potential revenues of US$26.3 million (US$19.7 million net the Company's 75% working interest) for 3.65 BCF of gross annual gas production would support a potential commercial development in an MOU-1 success case and provide multiples of the development capital requirements necessary to attract reserves-based lending."
So why have none of the above been mentioned in the future plans if MOU-1 was a success? Do the above scoping study apply for MOU-4 or mou2?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
If gcos was linked with just finding gas then Grf-1 well analysis clearly showed that there was gas. In today's RNS both PG and coo stated the success in finding gas but that imo was pretty evident from the GRF-1 /NuTech analysis.
What the main exam question to be answered was whether any Mou-1 gas find was commercial (given it was supposed to be "potentially transformational" for prd). RNS didn't have the word "commercial" which implies the Mou-1 gas find were non-commercial. "Commercial" word is very important and not something prd would leave out on purpose. Given that prd has enough data to describe the well as a "success" would mean that the gas finds are non-commercial, as the word commercial has not been used to describe the gas finds from Mou-1. Further data for this well is more to do with MOU-4 and from todays rns, MOU-2.
Is MOU-4 better than Mou-1 with respect to proximity to pipeline, infrastructure, chance of success, etc.? Market needs to get these info on the upcoming wells and funding required, especially given the market has been caught blindsided with Mou-1 experience?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
"because they haven't got the detailed logs back yet..."
So if prd don't have the detailed logs for MOU-1 yet, how can the MOU-1 well be described as a success in the RNS? If detailed analysis is pending, how can it be classed as a successful well before such analysis is communicated? Unless definition for success has been redefined since the drill?
All IMO dyor
Why would you need a Chief Operating officer if it's just to drill exploration wells, prove up the resource and monetize? If farm in was on cards why hire a COO of your own and add on more expenses? It seems imo that prd is going sdx route to operate the license same way by monetizing the same way as SDX does for Rharb basin which means drilling non- stop for puddles and monetizing small gas shows whether in Mou-1, Mou4, mou2, etc. Although sdx has a lot of infrastructure in place to monetize while prd doesn't - "potentially transformational" to success is not final, says it all(we'll keep drilling and who would keep funding?).
On the RNS last week, more than 70 million shares traded hands in one day - all were traders?
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
This is worse imo. They are basically confirming going the SDX route of monetizing small /single digit BCFs at a time? Look at where SDX has been stuck with that approach? If you don't have a big discovery, this is a bad option going after small puddles as SDX does imo as the capex pit to drill small wells would be big to keep dipping in. Prd is not an exploration play anymore it seems.
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
Spawmy/NH, etc. - The issue imo is that most holders on here thought the market would open -70% if it was a duster and not -40%? So that implies to some that maybe it's not really a non- commercial well and that there is more to it. So would rather wait to hear in writing that it's either non-commercial /plugged and abandoned than read between the lines imo.
Of course either side could be wrong but Its pretty simple really - logically if one is confident that the market has gotten it wrong and there is more to MOU-1 finding commercial hydrocarbons then one should buy more at current levels because they are confident that true value of MOU-1 to sp is much higher.
If MOU-1 is non-commercial, we wait for market to price appropriately re further capital raise and MOU-4 chances given Mou-1 non commerciality.
All IMO and could be wrong so always dyor
Geo - answer to those two questions is what the market has been trying to figure out. Rns didn't help much in answering them.
91jo- you are responding to another account who have just changed 'l' in the name with capital i. So keep an eye out. To answer your question - once answers to the questions raised by Geo above are out, depending on them prd will be attractive investment again. Until then most of us market participants are uncertain about the forward alpha that prd could/would deliver.
All IMO dyor