London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

................"Your (sic - not a good start a1m1) valuing the Co over 3 times higher than the brokers (sic) note"..............

........... would that be the one issued by Allenby Capital, aim1?? I said £30-£50m. Allenby states:

"We have downgraded our risked valuation of CLNR from £118m to £95m to reflect a lowered working interest assumption for P2252 and P2248 from 50% to 30%. Partly offsetting this factor is an uplift in our valuation quotient from $2/boe to 2.5/boe to reflect the successful farmout of P2252. We have continued to use $2/boe for P2248 and $1.5/boe for the 30th Round licences. After diluting for the prospective annual financing requirement of £2.1m our valuation/share is 15.7p against 18.9p previously"
http://www.allenbycapital.com/research/research-cluff-nat--resources.html

There are c.550m shares in issue, which values CLNR on Allenby's fair share price (15.7p) at £86m. Knock off P2248 if you like (it doesn't account for anything like 30-50% of CLNR's prospective resources - as I have already told you but you have ignored) and my valuation is still conservative.

Re a valuation of CLNR post discoveries, I presented a 'what if' valuation of 50p/share, which is just as relevant as your "everything about this company is bad" pitiful approach, never taking into account anything positive and failing to provide any evidence of anything you say will happen.

Hope you have managed to understand what Exploration has explained about the OGA and licence awards. He seems to me to know what he's talking about, unlike you.

I'm not getting personal - I would treat everyone who is like you in the same way. You present others as not knowing what you profess to, when in fact it is the other way around.

CLNR is fundamentally undervalued as a result of people who are chasing small amounts and are easily spooked (by people like you - they should know better) doing all the trading - predominantly selling to bank small uplifts in the price that get ever smaller as they sell. Not enough people see the upside LTHs do, but they can't be expected to just keep buying. New blood is needed.

If there is a big seller around it doesn't mean anything is wrong with CLNR - it just means there's a seller - perhaps to bank a significant gain because they have identified what they think is a better opportunity to grow their money - or maybe they're rebalancing their portfolio. Who knows? If a few major holders were selling there might be cause for concern.

Just thought I'd correct you again a1m1. I'm not having a debate. Keep warning everyone - I'm starting to find it funny, you're in such a pickle with your facts. Me valuing CLNR at 3x more than the broker? Try getting someone to read the note to you and/or buy a new calculator.

Your record's stuck and you'll have to change it...........

dyor

Do people note how someone who claims he posts "for the good of investors" (he holds no shares himself - he's here just to warn us) is constantly negative about CLNR's situation? I address all the points he makes from a realistic angle. He has failed on more than one occasion when asked by me to do so to say what he believes CLNR IS worth, preferring to keep saying relinquishing P2248 will be a disaster (it won't be) and that funds will have to be raised to pay for CLNR's share of the drill costs of an exploration well (should an investment decision be taken) on P2252 and (should it come to it) P2437.

Such drills are a long way off because a farm-out agreement has only just been signed on P2252 and work towards one on P2437 is still ongoing.

Let him have his way. Were CLNR to issue the same number of shares again to contribute to twp exploration wells Shell (and CLNR) believe are worth drilling, that would put 1.1bn shares in issue. It is realistic to hope the drills would lead to discoveries. If such discoveries were to show gas present in the prospective volumes, CLNR would be the owner of approximately 75MMboe gas equivalent.

Applying a conservative value of $7 per boe to that (one could argue higher but not much lower based on recent evidence on the UKCS) and ignoring anything CLNR owned at the time, I get to a simple net asset value (NAV - never mind NPV, which would be a good deal higher) of 47p - let's say 50p share. And that's on 1.1bn shares in issue, which imv is unlikely to happen.

As it stands, imv CLNR is worth £30m-£50m of anyone's money. It is a small cap explored and the position it's in is a great deal better than most of its peers. It isn't a blue chip investment. Most people seem to realise this, although I can think of one or two who don't. Where there's risk there has to be potential reward in equal or better measure. If people were to look at where CLNR has got to and what has been achieved, instead of concentrating only on the downside, I think they would quickly realise it ticks many of the boxes. No explorer ticks them all.

Use the filter. If I'd listened to experts like a1m1 when JOG's SP had fallen from the placing price of 22p to 8p "next year, Rodney" would never have become "this year - gosh, it's happened" (I was ok anyway as it happens) and I wouldn't have been able to invest what I took off the table in SQZ (22p avge) and CLNR (2.3p avge). The pivotal event for JOG? They farmed out Licence P2170 to what was then Statoil (now Equinor) which went on to make a discovery. There are 2.6 times as many shares in issue today as there were then and they're trading at around 235p.

Arrange the following into a well-known phrase or saying, a1m1: "yours up"

dyor

Foxes - seems v likely to me P2248 will be relinquished on 28 Feb. But there has to be a reasonable prospect of the OGA re-licensing it (or something close to it) in the next Licensing Round. Exploration has explained the process - make up your own mind. A great deal is being made of the relinquishment of a licence that is only one of many CLNR holds - I don't recall much value being attributed to any of the licences when they were issued. There are forces trying to present P2248 as a disaster, when it isn't.

The big news remains farming out P2252 to Shell and entering into an option agreement on P2437 that might lead to farming out that licence to Shell too. Whether or not the cash that will be needed for CLNR's still has to be raised 2 years+ down the line shouldn't really be exercising people now - much could happen that addresses this well before the money is needed. Modest funds might have to be raised for working capital if things look tight in a few months time but the effects would be limited.

CLNR is worth a lot more than the piddling £15m market cap presently says it is (550m shares @2.6p). The silly price is caused by (i) people who are negative talking the Company down, (ii) short-term traders following the stock who are fixated on price and don't do value - not that they'd be able to work it out if they were and (iii) silly claims about impending mega diliution,

If you want a comparison, how about Independent Oil & Gas (IOG)? IOG has a market cap of c.£15m too. What does IOG have that's different? Prospective reserves a fraction of CLNR's. Debts up to its eyeballs - near enough £20m - mostly owed to a debt provider that's in liquidation. A few million £ of short term debt for drilling done in 2016 - no point in the drilling company putting the bums in because there are no assets that would fetch anywhere near the amounts owed and there are others further up the food chain who would get any money first? Shall I go on?
https://www.independentoilandgas.com/downloads/reports/2018_06_June_30-IOG_plc_Interim_Statements_FINAL.pdf

Cluff has no debt. It has Shell as a partner and it is run on a shoestring. It has several other licences to farm out. With Shell on board it is a totally different proposition to what it was before the news. Yet people are selling because they take at face value the idiotic negative arguments being put forward by trouble-makers or clowns. How can the price move forward to something more sensible? Look beyond next week..

There should have been a share consolidation a while back to take CLNR out of the ''penny share" category which attracts the wrong kind of following. If I was Algy I'd put the Company in play. Roll on the day.

All imo
dyor

............."I myself would have to cancel a static caravan in shaggy and go somewhere more erotic"...........

...........that one had me giggling, ajax.

I see you revised 'shaggy to 'skeggy' but you forgot to change 'erotic' to 'exotic'. "Erotic in shaggy"............could make a good book - 'Legless in Gaza' kindathing.

'Erotic' could be fun

I wasn't taking the P when I wrote of my admiration for Butlins. I know about it because in the 1960s they held the schoolboys annual county football championship in Skegness and the accommodation was provided by Butlins. It was in Bognor Regis up to 1966 - there's a Butlins there too. Both 5* as far as I can recall although they didn't have any tea-making facilities in the rooms and you had to pee out of a window. Otherwise great apart from the beds and the sticky lino beneath the window.

£40 a share? In a few years maybe if things go right. Depends on the number of shares in issue and whether JOG gets to production with Equinor - not just Verbier and poss Cortina - or P2170 at large. It might pick up and farm out new licences - or form a partnership to bid with Equinor. There are all sorts of possibilities.

Dana Petroleum sold for £1.87bn in 2010. Oil prices were higher then and there was a different mood in the sector. It would take a few years (and more share will probably be issued). £40 a share would mean a market cap (or sale consideration) of about £875m based on the number of share currently in issue.

Below is what Dana's half year summary looked like in 2010. Make up your own mind. JOG would definitely have to motor to get anywhere near - but Dana's sale consideration was more than twice £875m. It's too early to form a view, but one can dream. Let's get a big volume of reserves booked in Verbier and take it from there. I'm not sure most people understand enough to work out what a big result at Verbier would make JOG worth. Too many people would sell simply because a good profit was available and this would keep the price artificially low. That's unless institutions and serious investors decided to invest.
http://www.dana-petroleum.com/media/1411/dana_ir_2010.pdf

dyor

.......the name's dickupham

......dickingham is not my style

"Lol Dick, you're now saying that the reason Algy sold is due to a drunken bet??? Lol, you are just making things up to fit your positive bias now, that's a corker!"...........

........no, a1m1 - I wasn't saying that. My comment (which was supposed to be vaguely humourous) was intended to make the point that neither Spencer not Algy will have regarded the amounts involved as significant. I don't know why Spencer and Dorfman became involved in a small cap oil & gas explorer. Neither has history in the sector but no doubt know Algy well on the senior charity circuit. What I do know is that successful people don't like being seen to fail - they only have one reputation. So it's certain they fully understand what they've invested in and will be looking for a significant return on their money. There was no suggestion of anyone being drunk - you made that up. You're a deceitful specimen lol (to use your common acronym).

You highlight many negatives:

1. potentially losing their flagship licence and 30-50% of p50 resource next week,
2. potential large placing imminent,
3 large seller in the market,
4 chairman selling off options rather than holding and showing confidence in future gains in the sp.
5 Poor deal with Shell, no free carry, no definite drilling

1. why do you call P2248 the "flagship" licence? Evidently it isn't because two other licences were chosen by Shell as having better prospects. There's a chance P2248 will be re-licensed to CLNR in the 32nd round - Exploration has told us what's involved. Surely nothing would have been said if it hadn't been discussed with the OGA? How would CLNR know it will be included in the next round if this wasn't so? The licence hasn't been relinquished yet. You're talking nonsense saying P2248 represents 30-50% of CLNR's prospective 2P resources. It doesn't. I'm not going to repeat all the detail you're too lazy to look up yourself. You don't seem concerned about making statements that are wrong.
2. You still won't read what I have posted re further placings. I have said why now would NOT be a good time to raise funds that won't be needed for 2 years or more. Much could happen in that period to provide cash without dilution.
3.The evidence suggests there is a large seller causing an overhang, although it isn't a certainty. If there is a seller (maybe more than one) why would this be seen as a negative? Individual circumstances and investment strategies drive investment decisions, not just a company's future prospects.
4. I can't imagine Algy thinks 3.5p (making CLNR worth <£20m) is CLNR's maximum potential. Why he sold to Spencer is between the two of them.
5. Bol-locks

You didn't tell me what CLNR is worth. That's probably because you don't know how to value shares, being totally fixated on short term price, not long term value.

I'm now applying the filter so you won't have anyone to debate with, Suggestion: Offski in Polski ("lol")

dyor

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for dickupham

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)