Member Info for Crocqman

For LSE, read FCA with regard to daily declared open short positions

Personally, I think the topic of 'shorts' is overdone when it comes to small cap shares on some boards.

It seems a bit of a default argument when a share is not doing well, or the SP is somehow unexplainable vs where posters feel it should be. Often it is thrown about as an insult thrown at a poster with a negative view.

There is not a great deal of evidence to show that shorts are open - the LSE publishes a daily list of open shorts over (I think) 0.50% and it is virtually impossible for a PI to open a short position. There has been no historical declared open short here from what I can see and anything under the disclosure threshold would have a minimal impact, if any impact at all, imo.

While there may be isolated situations of shorting in the small cap space, and certainly there can be coordinated attacks of a share by a group(s) to short a stock, the question for me would have to be why on earth would anyone want to short a share with a MCAP of

While this should be seen as a positive, and it is encouraging, we also know that identifying an opportunity and delivering that opportunity are 2 different things.

Also, with ANGS, delivery historically has proven to be painfully slow and very expensive compared to their own initial predictions.

I will wait for announcements on these opportunities before getting carried away, but will give RH the chance to show that his regime is different to the last, just like I did when GL took over his predecessor. To be fair, the bar is pretty low, but Brockham is a plus albeit nothing to get carried away about in terms of what it has done for the SP.

Ready to be surprised, but not at the expense of further dilution which hopefully the Brockham income can at least help with assuming the flows remain stable and they don't go down the route of throwing more money at it than needed

gla

I suggest you read their posting history.

It's all abuse of others and look at me, I know it all posts. Looks to be trying to scaremonger people to sell on other boards and buy into another stock. Safe to ignore imo

I think many may well feel the same way, tariq.

I currently have one worse performing share (suspended ay 98% down), but this small cap space is always going to be more misses than hits despite what some will claim.

My hits over the past 7 years have tended to be smallish gains, with a couple of good exceptions, but my misses are certainly larger ones, usually down to sitting and waiting rather than being proactive. The key is to take profits when you can, not to get too greedy and to certainly not to chase losses by keep averaging down. I feel now that trading these types of stocks could be a better option if you can time it right as there tends to be long periods out of news, and holding for the long term is a long wait, usually longer than expected even when things do go well.

Fortunately, I never invest what I can't afford to lose and I take responsibility for my investments, although this was one I did get caught out in the hype of somewhat when I first invested (on the back of success elsewhere).

Everything here was exacerbated by the huge spike in the sector which we all know now did not result in the delivery and sector gains many were investing for. The sector hype was far too soon for anyone in this space to realistically deliver and the long-term malaise here is not restricted to EQT in this space. Not all the issues here are down to management, but they did see far too late the need to concentrate on the smaller projects and extracting yourself from existing arrangements has proved to be costly.

I advocated for a long time to write off the UK market as there is no appetite to invest, and to concentrate on Europe and trying to complete Northfork and build on that in the US.

I do feel the current strategy is the right one, but we do need to see projects come to fruition and be on a stronger footing with regards to funding. Is the current management the right mob for the job though? History suggests a change might be needed, but who realistically has the experience, knowledge, contacts, etc to come in and do a better job? At this stage, a change may do more harm than good.

Will await next news. I have previously taken some losses here to offset gains in the last tax year and may look to do the same again this year, but will hold for now and likely not make any decision until towards the end of this calendar year depending on news. At the current SP level, further drops are immaterial and I have not seen anything to suggest selling out is the right move. My expectations here are realistic given where we are at, but management do need to do a lot better (broken record). A long term recovery play

gla

It's funny how many posters on these boards seem to think that every investor MUST think and act how they do.

Everyone has different strategies, investment horizons, risk levels, portfolio make-up, etc as well as different views of every company they are invested in or considering investing.

Why the obsession with what others are doing? Unless you are trying to influence them to buy or sell, of course

Let's just wait for next news. As posted before, now the vote is out of the way the management needs to deliver on the trust given to them by the majority by putting the right team in place, sorting out the funding and producing at the levels expected

It is the very nature of these types of stocks that there will be long pauses between news and the SP stays stagnant or drops as investors look for quick returns elsewhere.

We are still a long way off from production and need to keep hitting milestones in the interim as well as being prepared for more fundraising.

As posted recently, I'm fully invested but will perhaps look for some trading opportunities around news to try and increase number of shares hold. Will look for a double digit SP before considering this though.

Happy to wait. There is not much else to expect of management at this time, even an offtake may be a way off although we could be taken by surprise on this so always expect the unexpected.

All going to plan here currently, imo

I think highs is a stretch particularly in the short to medium term, given my initial investment was at 105 and others will be similar, but it would be good to see this being properly managed and at least in the short term start to achieve what those who invested at the earlier highs were expecting to see when they put their hard earned in.

I totally see where the long term holders are coming from with their gripes. This does have the potential to be a profitable company and the outlook in 2-3 years could be rosy if they get the next 2-3 months right.

What is the true value here? Only time will tell. Not making any SP predictions, but the potential suggests it should not be at these levels.

Funding, stability and delivery will change that

gla

So, was the drop today based on the market seeing or fearing one side winning over another? But which one?

We will see tomorrow. Hoping for a bounce with confirmation of the new appointment and this particular uncertainty out of the way.

Need further positive news deliverance in the coming weeks though to start to restore some shareholder sentiment here as well as the SP to move in the right direction.

Hoping some will draw a line under this now, but can't really see it, as already seen.

Hopefully this has been the wake up call needed to get the TGR house in order and to focus on delivery and results

Rampfest nubes. Lol

I've been invested here for circa 7 years and barely post on this board so hardly a nube and certainly not a ramper. And I don't see anyone new or old trying to ramp this either. I've even stated that there would be no interest in the oil or gas production and that government following through on a policy is hardly a given and that I only see SFB and the site as a money maker here and not legacy assets or any other pie in the sky idea they come up with elsewhere.

Just thinking out loud after watching the election debates and hearing multiple mentions from labour on a GB Energy entity and we what others may think, but ok, it's all just a pile of..... in your opinion so let's not even have a conversation.

I'm sure though if there was any truth in a government backed scheme there would be a better chance of getting whatever planning was required with them backing it than without.

A 13 post nube clearly knows best ;-)

Imo

Just a thought, but listening to labour keep talking about setting up a GB Energy company to look after UK energy interests if they get elected, could there be scope for SFB to be eligible for investment from this proposed new entity to develop gas storage should it become a reality?

Whether from an outright purchase, partnership of sorts, or funds to develop via loans at more generous rates.

Of course, nothing concrete for any policy or how it would potentially work, but could be something to bear in mind, even as an outside possibility if any government actually follows through on a policy once elected without it being scaled back so much to be unrecognisable from the much vaunted concept.

Not suggesting for a minute there would be any interest in the tiny amount of oil production or even SFB gas, merely the site itself for its potential for storage.

Too much of a stretch?

Not sure we need a tanker watch.

What exactly will it prove?

The days of getting excited about it are long gone. The expected volume is known, not really that material (in terms of a game changer for finances) and we will be able to see output from various sources in due course.

Genghis,

Why does no change of auditors mean another suspension is on the cards?

FY results deadline is still a way off.

More scaremongering

Bammo, as welcome as this news is, I do not see a re-rate on what is a low production level generating a small income stream.

Well done to the team for getting this back online, but for me, the money for Angus is still only to be found in SFB and gas storage potential

Steady but unspectacular. I am ok with this so long as they don't start throwing money at it which could be better used elsewhere.

Any income not to be sniffed at and I like the way this has been done, quietly (perhaps to keep out of sight of potential protests)

"No wonder everyone who has worked at the company, just wants to get out and stay away from it"

This doesn't quite fit with the fact that those closest to the company who have left have set up a group to try and force management out and take over the company, so they clearly do want to be 'in it'

It's just a pinned post. Something LSE do from time to time like when they have one of their own company interviews to promote.

What do you mean they refused to discuss or communicate with shareholders?

Plenty of personal meet and greet sessions long before this, plus Q&A's and many shareholders have contacted them by email and received replies too.

This is getting ever more desperate with the clear non-factual statements.

How about both sides look at the actual facts, people here are plenty big enough to make up their own minds

Keep up the good posting HarChris.

I believe the majority of investors on these boards have no issues with alternative views, it is the manner in which they are presented that irks at times.

I have been at my target level here for some time now, but if I wasn't I wouldn't be looking to add at this present time of uncertainty, but I still do not see anything to change my stance from a hold.

Will continue to monitor on news and await the results of the vote.

I'm sure most can agree that it is the funding that is key, whatever camp you fall into.

Everything else has different levels of importance to different people as can be seen from posts made.

gla

Why would they mention funding in an RNS about a NED appointment?

Seriously, talk about going out of your way to knock everything.

What are the group's plans for funding