Member Info for CrustyPete

Thanks Rog that is very revealing. As I mentioned a few days ago when the shorts start to close I would not want to be the last one closing out. That said, in closing those positions out they will do so, as far as possible, without affecting the market - so they will be looking to close out over an extended period of time.

It will also be interesting to see what happens with SO as, when and if we get back into the 60's.

Rog would you mind showing us where you get those "stock lending" figures....?

Yes indeed, though they may have been "back 2 back" trades executed for the purposes of creating a capital gain/loss in this tax year.... they were definitely "off-market" transactions so could have been many things - even a transfer of part of SO's holdings to another II perhaps?

"£30m MCap fair value"?? Fair value is open to opinion but it certainly is in no way correlated with whether Oliviera is still selling. The share price may well be affected by SO's selling but "fair value" doesn't change, whatever it may be.

I think we will see it happen within the stated timescales. The BoD don't really have much choice when they say that it will happen "on or before 24th January"

Keep an eye on those declared short positions. Recognising when they start getting closed down will be quite instructive - that will indicate that the shorters recognise that the downtrend as approaching the end - and who of them would want to be the last ones to close out?

And after extremely positive seismic results, CH1 drill, a GSA granted and a pipeline built I am sure we will be but until then I suspect any rise will be slow and steady.

"Only interested in my own ROI is what I am trying to say"

Yes Porky I think most people had worked that out......

I note that LBPS is down another 7.50% this evening - :0(

The most galling thing about this is that the bloody parasitic shorters are laughing all the way to the effing bank...

As I said MHB "nothing but significant, materially positive news...". A statement such as "evidence that the combination trial appears to work well...." would be what I would consider to be "materially positive".

I would agree with most of your post below MHB but must pick you up on the statement ".... it could have prevented the share price from collapsing ...."; I agree it certainly would have helped maintain the share price but I really do not think that any share of the MC of 4D, non income producing, in this sector, with sector sentiment as it is and with the limited liquidity of an AIM market share would have been able to maintain their share price with over 6% of their shares coming back to market from an II seller and with (possibly) yet another 6+% still overhanging that market. It is a "perfect storm", and with the parasitic short sellers adding to the malaise by milking it for all they are worth.

An explanation would have helped and we have had some relatively good news announced over recent weeks but nothing but significant, materially positive news would have enabled 4D share price to swim against that tide....

I would not argue with that one iota Tanz and no I would not consider transferring my holding to char - I was simply pointing out and reinforcing bullfrog's point that there is absolutely no basis of comparison between these two entities and therefore any suggestion that because one's share price has risen on the back of a gas discovery that the others ought necessarily to do so so too.... if we were making another gas discovery no doubt our share price would rise but we haven't and nothing has (yet) changed.

Yes Tanzania and one of them might be getting the full market price for their gas and the other might not..... so there is no meaningful measure for comparison.

If Ocean Capital have a covered short the net effect is neutral.....

You may be right, of course, PoC and I hope you are but I would be very surprised if ARA get a GSA concluded until after the outcome of the CH1 drill at the very earliest; the details of the GSA will be contingent on the drill outcome.

Yes, I am sure that it will be but we will not see the full value of that and, what is more getting a GSA in place could still be a long way off by which time, then and only then will the market price will impact that conversation. It certainly makes no difference to our current "enterprise value".

Oh and the $40m is the estimated total first year income - our 25% will give us $10m...... but yes any increase would be good news however matginal.

" especially with energy prices the way they are" and how does that affect a company with zero production and gas generated income? Moreover even when AEX were producing gas at KN1 the price we received was a fixed price dictated by our Kiliwani GSA (with a very small element correlated to gas prices) and I suspect that, when we eventually get a GSA for Ntorya (2023?) the same will be true of that too. But until AEX is "producing" again and have income generated by our (ARA's) Ntorya GSA our enterprise value is totally unaffected by the world gas price.....

Okay thanks for pointing that out Ufufuo and yes I see that now. However to suggest that the future PE of a business in 2024 ought to be reflected in its current shareprice is manifestly laughable..... not least because it is not guaranteed as we all know. Maybe once the C1 spud is complete, we have a pipeline and we have a GSA then they may have a point - until then forget it.

Q3 is forecast for CH1 spud.

Ufufuo, I would not take issue with much of your post though would point out that much of what you have stated has been known for a very long time and yet has never had any significant influence on the sp or MC and until investors are persuaded that the long awaited developments are now nailed on they will still sit on the side lines. Of course we are now much closer to getting Seismic results and, hopefully, not too many months from CH1 spud, so I am sure that the investment will eventually come - firstly as a trickle and eventually as a rush (closer to spud date).

However I do have to point out that your suggestion that AEX should be worth a lot more than the "current paltry one times p/e multiple rating" is blatantly erroneous. As I am sure you are ware P/E is a Price to Earnings ratio. AEX have ZERO earnings, indeed they have negative earnings and hence a negative P/E ratio and they will do until either KN1 or Ntorya starts to bring in income. P/E is an irrelevant measure for a company not earning any income and will have NO bearing on the sp until they do...

Thanks BG, not too bad, Covid affected but, on the whole, pretty good.... :0)