Member Info for dickupham

Tugs & supply vessel in attendance...............what do you reckon, bullson? :-)

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:6.447/centery:64.806/zoom:13

Noix - have you considered having a debate with a left-over Christmas vegetable instead? You might find it less frustrating :-)

yours sincerely

the resident copier & paster

People seem not to have read what the Company has actually said on the subject of value. AB hasn't talked about share price (except to say recently that now wasn't the time to be potentially raising funds because to do so would be dilutive to existing shareholders' interests given the market's low appreciation of what JOG is potentially sitting on) People also don't seem to have read what one or two posters on here have said either - I don't mean the resident simpleton, I mean those who have been following JOG's situation closely and have a reasonable understanding of the overall investment case

No-one is actually talking about JOG's share price. It's value that has been being discussed. The number of £9.17 per share (for instance) is the value that would be attributable to Verbier alone in an upside case (130MMboe), calculated using NPV/DCF. As has frequently been stated by JOG (it's been in every presentation and can still be found on the website) Cortina prospectively holds even more reserves that Verbier, so in a successful upcoming appraisal case at Verbier and a successful drill case at Cortina, with reserves of somewhere towards the top end of expectations, in 12-18 months we could be looking at a reserves value to JOG (using a NPV/DCF method of valuation) of around £20 per share.

Then there's the cash to be added in, assuming Cortina doesn't use more than is presently anticipated (£6m) plus any further prospective reserves, inc Meribel (which is small) and whatever might be thrown up by the 3D seismic study currently under evaluation.

As to whether a company's value is mirrored by its share price, that's another matter entirely. The market would have to understand it first and the evidence is it doesn't care, short-term at least. Someone who's very well respected on the investment scene (not the resident simpleton) once said: "price is what you pay; value is what you get". Buffett was his name.

I might sell a few at £43 in 3 or 4 years' time and buy a holiday pad, assuming I can still walk. Market cap of £937m needed - get a move on please.

dyor

Noix - not being super-critical but what you've recorded as net income and converted into £ per share hasn't been discounted back to reflect risk and the cost of money (inflation) - ie onto a NPV basis of valuation. If this were to be done my guess is your number of £16.10 per share wouldn't be too far off AB's estimate for Verbier alone in a top estimate scenario of £200m (£9.17 per share).

It shouldn't be forgotten that Cortina is prospectively bigger than Verbier and it will be interesting to see what the 3D seismics say about the potential opportunities in the wider Licence Area.

Could be a lot going on in 2019..............I'm hopeful

GLA & HNY

I have never made reference (in relation to the value of certain posters' contributions) to the number of shares anyone might be holding. My comments are in relation only to the quality (or lack thereof) of the information and opinions given without qualification by the relevant poster/s. In relation to my own holding I have only ever said I have one that is significant to me. What is significant to me might not be significant to someone else.

GB's latest question (how much pure profit is there in a barrel of oil) demonstrates his lack of understanding of virtually everything involved with investment. He should already have read and understood what the company has said about it many times. It isn't the fact he doesn't understand I find annoying but the fact he doesn't understand that he doesn't understand and he therefore regards his opinions as being as valid as anyone else's.

I know this is only a blog and of course people are free to think and write whatever they want, but if you want value out of the forum, it pays to work out who the ones are who have some knowledge that might be useful and those who don't. I don't comment on 'oil industry technicals' because I don't have a background in the industry. But I do comment on financial and valuation aspects because that is where my experience lies. I love reading comments from people who are or were 'in the industry' because they help me pull everything together and get a more rounded understanding of the investment case. (which is what I like most about JOG and always have done). We are blessed with top-notch directors who give it their all, not least because their own financial success is tied in with JOG's. All we need now is a fair roll of the dice and everyone should end up smiling. I'm pretty sure the BoD has a clearly set strategy for medium term success.

The point of using NPV (the product of discounted cash flow forecasts - DCF) to value oil reserves is to get to the cash value (or "profit") in these. There are books on the subject - I am not going to explain it all here.

Any asset that is held for commercial gain can only have one value - and this is the sum of all the cash that asset will generate for the owner over its lifetime, measured in cash at present value. It not a perfect way to get to value because DCF modelling involves the use of assumptions (mainly as to risk and cost of money - or in simple terms 'inflation') and projections of cash income and spend involve the future. But it's the best there is. P/E is a more normally used measure of share value - it is much simpler, but still involves making assumptions about the future and most companies cheat by adding back all kinds of expenses to earnings because this presents directors performance in a better light. I'm fed up with seeing "adjusted EBITDA" used as the "E" in P/E, not least because it makes peer comparisons all but impossible.

Enough.

GLA

Morning Eistein.

You didn't answer any of my questions, all of which it was reasonable to ask. I can now add another: how do you know who I've been talking to and who I haven't?

Re it being the internet and it being in order for you to be whoever you want, I have to disagree. On your basis it would be ok for me (for instance) to join a medical advice forum and freely make statements about the efficacy of various drugs I know nothing about. I would never do this, for obvious reasons. I comment on the JOG (and a couple of other) boards because I am a shareholder and I have relevant experience gained at a high level over a long period. I am only being factual.

Let's clarify one thing. You say "jog's bod are burning cash and don't seem to be telling us what is going on". They don't have to tell you what's going on, except as obligated by statute, or in order to comply with protocols set by the market in which the shares trade (AIM). Do we take it you think they should stop spending money on things like salaries and overheads because they aren't telling you what you want to hear? They're intelligent people running a publicly listed company, graybird - not bouncers. They WOULD unnecessarily be burning cash, however, if they needlessly issued RNSs telling people like you what you don't need to know, because the LSE charges a considerable amount for each one. Check it out.

Don't forget to tell us how your next visit to the Company's offices goes.

I'd get someone down the gym to explain a few things to you before your next post, graybird - an averagely intelligent 5 year old wouldn't be that proud of the gibberish you manage to come up with. You really haven't got a clue.

As for your continuing snide and cowardly remarks about the directors (AB's in particular) efforts on behalf of shareholders, you should hang your head in shame. You walk in off the street claiming to be a shareholder but with no proof you are, AB has the decency to accommodate you and spend half an hour helping you understand JOG's present situation and forward strategy more clearly - and you reward his trust with loud-mouth blabbing on a public board about him saying this and him saying that, when it's as plain as a pikestaff he would have expressed himself far more cautiously than you report to the world at large.

Ever been CEO of a listed company? Ever been a director of ANY company of any size? Have you, GB? Any idea about company law? Or anything else? Gosh - what a surprise. You come across as such an expert.

When are you planning your next visit to JOG's offices? I'd be a bit careful if I were you, given they're on the second floor of Howard House and pavements are quite hard when you land on them from a height. Also, don't forget to tell us how you get on when you walk in unannounced on Equinor and tell them you're a savvy investor in JOG.

FI

jmo

Thank you for yesterday's 14.22 hrs post, bullson. You demonstrate the rarest of all personal attributes inside a few sentences of shared wisdom. It's called 'understanding'. Thank you.

I generally prefer to link a reader of my posts (perhaps there are none left?) to information provided by those 'close to the action' that would allow the reader to work out the meaning of what's written in English and then perhaps make use of a calculator to get to (in the most recent case) Malcy's target of £10 per share (SP - based on his assessment of value).

I have little patience where lack of knowledge and understanding is concerned and the guilty parties aren't willing to make even the slightest effort to start to fill the void - usually preferring instead to throw out insults as they loudly shout their personal views, usually based on thin air.

In September, Andrew Benitz took the trouble to apply a monetary value to a 'range' of possible outcomes for the Verbier discovery. He only stated volumes and values relating to Verbier (deriving from NPV calculated in the ways he described). These numbers were £30m for the low case and £200m for the high case.

Maybe people don't understand the significance of the number of shares a company has in issue? In JOG's case this is presently 21.8m. Ergo: £30m divided into 21.8m shares is about £1.38 per share; and £200m divided into 21.8m shares is about £9.17 per share. He told us this value only applied to Verbier. Cortina prospectively contains a lot more reserves than Verbier, the former being about 2km distant from Buchan itself, at its closest boundaries.

So it's easy to see how Malcy got to a SP of £10 in the foreseeable future. You can't take what Equinor got for two non-core, low-quality assets in Norway and then apply the same ppb to likely high-quality oil discovered at Verbier, which JOG (and no doubt its partners in P2170) value on a discounted NPV basis because the declared intention is to take the discovery 'all the way'.

One thing is certain. If JOG was tempted to sell its 18% interest in P2170 pre-FDP and invest the proceeds in producing assets, the ppb it achieved for (fully certified post appraisal) discovered and prospective reserves would be in multiples of $3pb.

I'm targeting this - holiday pads are a bit of a pest to maintain but some can be worth the trouble (2.5 vergees = 1 acre btw): https://www.gaudin.je/sales/property/6456518-la-rue-de-bel-air-st-mary-jersey

jmo - wtfdikaa?

DSR

Some good posts from interested investors of late - we all seem to be swimming around looking for a buoy to cling onto until help arrives!

Equinor's recent sales were interesting (but that's all) in that they did provide a up to date benchmark of sorts but, as sotb pointed out yesterday, we're hardly comparing like with like. Oil discoveries in the Buchan Area over the decades have generally been in the range 25-40 API ('high end quality' in layman's terms - as I understand the situation anyway). What Equinor has just sold is different. We already know Equinor, JOG and CIECO all rate Verbier's prospects highly and they've pulled out all the stops to prove that what's been discovered is only for tip of the mythical iceberg.

Just as a reminder, AB's views of JOG's present situation (last September) and more specifically JOG's interest in Verbier alone, were expressed in his interim statement, as follows:
"The objective of the well programme is to determine whether the Verbier oil volumes are within the low case of 25mmboe, the mean case of 69mmboe, or greater. JOG has provided internal management estimates of the value potential for the estimated recoverable oil volume ranges, together with an opinion that all outcomes are potentially commercially viable. The potential low case net present value ("NPV"), net to JOG is in excess of £30m whereas the high case is in the order of £200m (source: Management's estimates using a 10% discount rate, the October 2017 Brent strip curve and indicative JOG development and production cost estimates). Neither of these scenarios take account of the additional upside potential of the Cortina prospect, located on our licensed acreage, which is estimated to hold mean Prospective Resources of 124mmboe (source: ERC Equipoise Limited Competent Person's Report released in March 2017), or further prospectivity across the licence area".

https://www.investegate.co.uk/jersey-oil---38--gas-plc--jog-/rns/interim-results/201809200700133326B/

Nothing significant - except the appointment of a very well qualified CFO - has changed since then. My guess is that JOG will have used an oil price of around $70pb in its workings. We know prices are presently influenced (more than) by the criminals (politicians and investment banks, plus the odd few hundred opportunistic hedge funds) who are using present world disorder for their own unprincipled purposes. In the long term, supply naturally seems to meet demand (with OPEC's help) somewhere in the range $70 - $80 so, as the international situation hopefully stabilises, prices should eventually find better levels.

I'll be surprised if we hear anything about the fast-tracked 3D seismic data before all the relevant information, including the Verbier appraisal results, has been pulled together and externally vetted. My best estimate is that this is unlikely to happen before Q2 2019 (April/May).

jmofwiw
dyor

https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/122818-norways-equinor-closes-470-million-sale-of-gas-field-stakes

I have to retract the previous post. Sincere apologies Lexion - I have not been thinking clearly having been unwell.

I now read: "King Lear -- described by Aker BP as one of the largest undeveloped discoveries on the Norwegian Continental Shelf -- holds an estimated 77 million boe in recoverable resources"

King Lear fetched $250m, which is $3.25pb.

Using this as a benchmark, JOG's top end of estimate 23.4MMboe would be worth $76m, or £60m (as you correctly say).

Not sure Verbier oil would fetch this little. At present Equinor clearly feels it's worth a lot more

Lexion: "At top end Jog share of 23 mob (would be) worth about 60 million at that sale price"............

no it wouldn't. It would be worth 23.4MMboe x 487p = £114m

That's 523p per share for Verbier alone.

You say: "Pity Jog only have 18% though"............

.........care to explain your thinking on this? How would you have funded the first drill?

.........."Equinor sells their 77MMboe discovery to BP for £200m"............

The Energy Voice article states: "Equinor’s 77.8% stake in the King Lear gas find has been sold to Aker BP for almost £200 million. A second non-operated interest of 42.38% in the in the Tommeliten Unit (PL044 TA) and 30% in PL044 to PGNiG was sold for almost £175m".................."Estimated net recoverable resources are 77 million barrels of oil equivalent".

The consideration is £375m for 77MMboe, the ppb achieved is $6.19pb.

https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/122818-norways-equinor-closes-470-million-sale-of-gas-field-stakes

JOG's interest in Verbier alone (mininimum volume of 25MMboe x 18%= 4.5MMboe) has now been bench-marked at a value of $27.86m or £22m. Add the cash and the prospects for the rest of P2170 and everything else - mostly intangibles and divide it by 21.8m.............

.......sorry - forgot. JOG would have to pay someone a good deal to get rid of them because they're clearly a waste of space. That's why the three partners in P2170 have paid a fortune for all the new 3D seismics and Equinor, as operator, has fast-tracked the Verbier appraisal (forget about the delays in the WP's drilling schedule; they don't matter - certainly to LTHs).

There's no point trying to predict share prices that are set by the "don't knows and don't understands".
Wake me up sometime next summer.

I've been unexpectedly away for a few days but note on my return that SQZ is doing quite well. What a hoot. Watch this space with CLNR in Jan and have a laugh.

dyor

You can follow it here:

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:755475/mmsi:636015427/vessel:ENSCO%20121

"Jersey Oil and Gas also intends to leverage the £25m of tax losses gained by the company through the Reverse Take Over of Trap Oil in August 2015, through the successful acquisition of UK North Sea production assets"........

https://www.jerseyoilandgas.com/investors/

"its a known fact about 80% of oil exploration firms go under"...........

.......is it, GB?? Please quote your source reference............who is this fact known by?

I suggest you consider the information in the public domain about JOG's finances and future plans, This comment also applies to rameez123.

I do not believe I have ever made a prediction about JOG's SP. To the extent I may have mentioned it in any of my posts, it will only have been to compare it with what I see as fair value. There is no evidence to suggest you have called JOG's price better than anyone else because you don't know what others (including me) are holding, when we bought or what we paid for our shares.

I have to concede you haven't been bad at predicting recent trends, but this is only because you think in the same way as (what I believe will be shown to have been) irrational or nervous sellers - who are selling when all the evidence suggests they should be doing the opposite.

It's only as I see things. Time will tell (and it will cost me) if I'm wrong.

I'm switching off now. Hope you all have a Happy Christmas and a prosperous new year - yeah, even you GB :-)

...........he got pulled down by the Balls..............

ha ha

You seem confused, GB. It was you, not me, who said JOG would be worth 45 mill if 25 mill of oil was recoverable.
That volume of oil IS recoverable - it was discovered in the immediate vicinity of the well-bore. This, to me, implied they believed that, had the sidetrack been able to extend further, a lot more recoverable oil would have been discovered beyond.

Taxes etc don't affect the value of a company's oil reserves except when it comes to preparing NPV/DCF valuations. I have difficulty believing you used these when coming up with your random numbers.

I think it would have been more honest to have said you haven't got a clue about anything to do with oil, valuing companies or anything else anyone normal would find useful. That's only a personal view of course. I'm just keen to ensure no-one is misled by the product of your empty head. Please don't take offence - I'm just trying to be truthful.

As it's the festive season, here's one for you to contemplate. I'll provide the answer in a later post:

Q. What happened when Santa got stuck down the chimney of a house occupied by Mr & Mrs Ball and their children?

tbc......

Just think - progress on the farm-out/s might well continue to be made over the holiday period. Big deals don't stop for holidays. And there's no particular reason why it would be expected a deal will take until the end of January to finalise the terms of. Common sense and experience tells me the discussions wouldn't have progressed to "exclusive" if the sides were a million miles apart in what both felt was fair and achievable when others were excluded from the discussions.

Wouldn't it be a great start to the NY if we switched on to a "the deal is done" RNS at the open on 2 January? Depending on the terms of the deal, CLNR's price could fly.

It would be a pity to miss out, but those who haven't taken their seats at the CLNR table shouldn't let it worry them too much over the long holiday period....................

There are always mishaps at Christmas. Consider what happened when Santa got stuck in the chimney of a house owned by a Mr & Mrs Ball.............he got pulled down by the Balls

:-)

The oracle hath spoken thus:
"looking like i was right all along lol, oil not as good as we were lead to think , buy more avg down is a fools game on jog , if jog does prove to be as good as you lot think , you dont need to risk any more cash,i value jog at 45 mill if 25 mill of oil is recoverable"..............

....such eloquence he willingly shareth with us..........transcending all before; the like of which cannot be compared; the like none could ignore.

25 mill of oil IS recoverable. QED: JOG is worth 45 mill, which I make 206p a share.

Buy some quick, GB.

Hi Ajax - the reason petrol & diesel prices don't fall as quickly or as far as the oil price is because, taking a pump price of 130p a litre, only 50p of this is the 'product' price (being: product cost plus the profit any supplier would expect to make to supply it). Even though it's been frozen for years, there is a flat rate of fuel duty of 57.95p per litre and you can work out the VAT.

This is a government that until recently felt that a fair division of the spoils - ie profits made by oil companies, should their extremely high risk and huge exploration costs, incurred over an average period of close to 10 years before getting to first oil led to profits - was 38% for the oil companies and 62% for the UK Exchequer. Take a bow George Osborne, who when the Conservatives were elected in 2010 unbelievably increased the draconian rate of 60% charged in GKB's time of 60% (GKB = "Gordon Knows Best".........selling the UK's entire gold reserves at $300 an ounce to enable him to pay benefits to his supporters confirms this title).

It's little wonder oil companies abandoned the North Sea in their droves. Consider how much they're all now paying in tax - the linked article might be better entitled: "Over-milking the cash cow"

https://theecologist.org/2017/apr/05/north-sea-oil-industry-cost-uk-taxpayers-ps400m-last-year-and-counting

And we're supposed to listen to them about Brexit?? Tip: consider what their recommendations are and then do the opposite. At least we'll have a chance.

dyor

I suspect it's abnormal because there are relatively few shares in issue, noix. So JOG's SP 'gearing' is much higher than most other shares. There are still only 21.8m shares in circulation and these are relatively tightly held.

The upside is that if any volume of people want to start buying, the price will quickly escalate. People like me and a few others who post on here, not to mention the directors, their families and friends and the institutions (all of whom are focusing on longer term value) won't be tempted to sell at anything less than what they see as fair value which, on the issue of positive news - for instance following the forthcoming appraisal and 3D seismic results - could easily be a long way ahead of where we sit today.

Oil & gas is a notoriously risky sector to be in but the gains can be very substantial if you choose the right companies. Happily for me I was able to see the potential value in JOG earlier than most because I was heavily into TRAP and knew a lot about its situation near the end. I could say more................

We're going through a long period of uncertainty caused by Equinor changing its plans. Nothing has fundamentally changed - more patience is required and it's been depressing watching the continuous price slide. The problem with selling in order to buy back cheaper is that selling what I'm holding wouldn't help the price much, assuming the MMs would take my shares in the first place. I might then not be able to buy back in. It would all involve a crystal ball in any event.

The price should start to recover when the WP sets off for UK waters and a more tangible timescale can be applied to the remaining drills.

GL

dyor