Member Info for cringsing

Olderwiser.

Without shadow of doubt, the disturbance today was in my view a concerted effort to cover some precarious short positions. And I’d say it worked rather well.
Why anybody decided to sell into that nonsense, I have no idea. We have had a burning for weeks, so obvs there is oil !!

The last short squeeze I had the pleasure of raking in on was when shorters were caught out on Ocado some 10-12 years ago. Those clever short specialists were laughing their ****s off over a grocery business planning to use algorithm-managed robots to pick peoples groceries in dark warehouses around the country.

mate, there are no earnings…

@CEObaib

“green myth” ??
I’m not so sure. These chaps already supply power to 7m U.K. homes and have been awarded contracts to 2.5x of current capacity. And they are moving ahead with breakneck speed. (there are circa 23m homes in the U.K.)

https://orsted.com/en/media/newsroom/news/2022/08/20220831559011

@Blackadder 19:09

I totally agree. I am sure the recent A2 RNS came across as ok but slightly bland for exactly that particular reason. I’d be super surprised if we are not bidding on some of the adjacent blocks. If we are, I’d say that will big the best possible indicator (for now) of what the BoD’s thinks of the A2 prospects…. Exciting days ahead…

@Blackadder 16:23

As far as I know, the winning bid will be made public on 9/11 Alaska time, so if PANR somehow is involved, I’d expect an RNS next Thursday or Friday.

I can’t see any PANR interviews happen until after the window for bidding on available leases closes on Nov 3rd.

Can’t wait for the BlytheRay interview on this RNS :-)))

https://twitter.com/ijduwa/status/1583312067355820032?s=46&t=RaI5SNiF4RAsJjgB_cd82A

12:07
“Is that realistic”

No it’s not. The point I was making was that even if PANR only had half the estimated OIP, the stock is still a bargain at current levels, also against competing opportunities.

I do not think there is any doubt as to the officially reported OIP among specialists (which I am not). All we need now is flow flow flow.

Good write-up Scot, and as layman I defo agree to all of it.

Whereas some people say it’s the journey to your destination that enriches the trip, I reckon the case of PANR (as with many other quality stock) not to be the case. Didn’t AMZ have a similar trajectory ? We clearly have not had a 88E or GameStop experience (which could have been fun), but for most LTH’s matters little. What matters here is the ‘destination’ which most of us are adequately satisfied is in the right ballpark. Hell, even with only half the OIP, it’s still massive. Whether it’s producible, hopefully we are likely to get a rather informed view on that very shortly. GLA

gents,

I am trying to get some understanding of how the longterm test is like to run. There now is a long horizontal run with 30ish frack points. Will the longterm testing be a sequential test of each frack point at a time, to find flow- and decline rates of each of the fracks, or is it done in sections (several fracks at same time, or are they likely to test the entire length in one process step ? I would think they will prefer to know the performance per frack, to further improve modelling of more well, but what do I know :-))

It’s my understanding that PANR has become a target for some short seller activities, and as these explorations (more often than not) end in tears, I reckon it was all to be expected, especially as the current SP is rather substantial.

So I was thinking this. If we assume some 10% of PANR stock going out on loan to short gamblers (near 80m shares), and we were to get a RNS informing us of plenty of oil flow, wouldn’t the short-sellers (presumably is sheer panic) have to buy the 80m shares back from the market at 8am on the very day the RNS lands ??

This isn’t exactly a case where the share price may just stay up on good news, so I would think the short sellers are taking a rather significant risk.

Maybe I’m away with the fairies here, but the thought of shorters trying desperately to get hold of millions of shares on a set of good news, is rather exhilarating, assuming this is the way it worked.

Today’s SP movement in my view must be caused by Farallon shedding more stock, or people who gambled on an optimism-driven last-minute surge now taking money off the table, avoiding the risks associated with the ‘real event’ early/mid October. I can make sense of that.

What I struggle more with is what “bad outcome” for the A2 work will mean for the rest of the acreage. Or in simple
terms, how much proof of concept is A2 for the other opportunities. I reckon it’s either “very little” or “quite a lot” but not sure which. Eg. if A2 doesn’t produce commercial flows, are we looking at a eg 25% or 90% drop in SP. If all opportunities are truly independent, a poor A2 outcome should not affect the other zones, but are all zones truly independent ? If we eg assume A2 will flow beautifully but it doesn’t, why would the same assumption not be wrong for the remaining acreage, as these assumptions will be made by same folks and on same technology. Because we have not had commerciability confirmed for any of a number of zones, there are quite a few birds in the same nest so to speak.

Whereas a good A2 outcome undoubtedly will be a bit of a SP rocket, just pondering what a less fortunate outcome could look like…..

Not earth-shattering news, but F being somewhere between 0-10% should render any risk of any further sudden SP reversals due to the excessive F-selling, more or less nil. So all promising news in my book. Can’t see any reason for upgrade of processing kit (extra cost) unless the management are reasonably content they will need the extra capacity. Not many sleeps left now…

Always appreciate independent verification, but isn’t this verification by the same mean/tech (VAS) of the same samples as PANR itself credited for the same results back in the Winter ? Or am I mixing it up with another earlier VAS based verification ? I am a bit confused… So clearly is the CEO who struggles to remember which hole they drilled just the other day. Typos are OK elsewhere, but surely somebody (else) in the company would have had 5 minutes to read it prior to submitting it. Sticks out like. sore thumb. On an unrelated issue, did the company not state a while ago that they would prepare for another round of data-room visits ?? Do we know if this is happening ? (as I tend to agree this is all getting a bit much for a small explorer) Surely this can easily be done in parallel with production testing Alkaid-2….

HI scot126 and thank you for a comprehensive answer. If opportunities were to arise across the two companies, I didn’t envisage some “equal partner” joint venture, but more some type of david/goliath agreement in specific areas. As you mentioned, they are at rather different evolutionary stages. Anyway, it’s all in the future, and I’m sure if oppts were to arise, the execs would consider those objectively.

Oh, small point scot. I’m not growing radishes. Never have, and can’t stand them. A rare case of sloppy research on your part ;-)

PANR & 88E fans can argue against each other’s assets till the cows come home, but that’s a not a clever strategy.

Read up on the Nash Equilibrium….

My immediate take is this:
If we have a viable case at Alkeid-2, there is a rather good chance 88e also have viable oil at Icewine.
If both companies will produce, I can only see that as a case for sharing infrastructure re access to TAPS. Sharing = lower cost for each involved party. Apologies if too simplistic.

@Checkout

Neither PANR nor 88e currently have the luxury of certainty, so must do with probability. As for PANR, they are very probably on to a winner. If PANR ends up being a winner, 88e due to location and geology will highly probably also be a winner. To suggest there is no correlation as no drilling/testing has been done, in my view is a big mistake. The correlation is the location and geology. All in my view obvs.

https://twitter.com/geodesrock49/status/1548833554754285568?s=21&t=tBmQjBmZIZNVu4jXFrLSSA

nice oppt imv….