Member Info for dickupham

I don't usually state the size of my holdings except in general terms (my LSE posting history shows this, as would 10 years of posts on interactive investor as eagle51 if anyone could work out how to use it now). XEL is history so I was open about my holding there. In saying I hold 3m CLNR, I must have been distracted by the Ryder Cup and lost concentration! I'm actually holding 3.025m CLNR for some reason - don't ask me why. I'm down a bit but not by much. I see CLNR as Algy's swansong and the presence of Michael Spencer and Lloyd Dorfman on the shareholder register is likely to be significant (my guess is Algy and these two hold a blocking vote in the event of a hostile attempt to acquire CLNR on the cheap - that happened to Algy with Cluff Resources which got taken out by Ashanti Gold and it still irks: https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-5774883/Oil-tycoon-Algy-Cluff-tells-new-drilling-boom-dubbed-North-Sea-II.html

Q. Why was CLNR awarded the largest number of licences in the last round when it has a market cap of about £12m and very little in the bank? Farm-out is the key.

In (part) answer to your question, dunderhead, in investment value terms I've got a lot more riding on SQZ than CLNR and twice as much riding on JOG as SQZ and CLNR put together. I've also got some safe stuff in well-chosen (based on fund manager history and investment criteria) but that sort of stuff bores me.rigid. I'm not normal in my approach to life generally for reasons I won't bore you with.

Ref SQZ and looking at one asset only - Erskine - today's statement by Mitch Flegg suggests it will come back to full production at the same level as Q1 last year - c.3k boepd. Work out the NPV of a million barrels a year (even if only for a few years) with oil prices at somewhere between $65 & $85pb with an extraction cost of (say) $15pb. I built in standard 10% industry discount for risk and added a conservative 5% for money cost and the DCF result accounted for a sizable chunk of a total market cap of £230m. That's just Erskine.

BKR, Columbus, Rowallan et al have relatively little value ascribed to them in the circumstances. It might be said by some the market is always right, but whether the market understands is another matter entirely. I'm prepared to wait for the fundamentals to play out.

The importance of BKR cannot imv be over-estimated and there's significant risk until the deal is completed. The pointers are positive so I'm optimistic. There's only so much cash available to 'invest' and I like all three shares I'm in so I'm reluctant to switch out of one to put into another. I see JOG as the more undervalued (JOG vs SQZ) based on measurable criteria and I like the thought of a ride on CLNR if it manages to farm out the larger of its two older gas licences.

SQZ being the farminee would be perfect but I don't suppose it will happen.

Everything in oil involves risk.

all imo/dyor

"I have a close relative working on this project from a BP perspective (at a senior but not director level), so I have a bit of insight from him, although quite rightly he is quite tight lipped about it. It's certainly not a done deal by any means"........

........stating on a discussion forum like this that from BP's perspective "It's certainly not a done deal by any means" seems to me a bit too close for comfort to 'inside information', cc - or is it just your opinion?

I prefer what an official spokesperson is reported by SPA Global to have stated recently, as brought to our attention by jasehem on Wednesday evening:
"The OFAC license authorizes the provision of goods, services and support by a short list of US suppliers. The services these suppliers provide are not critical to the day-to-day safe operation of the Rhum field," the spokesman said".
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/092618-uks-rhum-gas-field-can-continue-to-operate-without-us-license-bp

Combined with what's stated in this morning's RNS by Mitch Flegg, my reading is that the deal is good to go on 1 November on present estimates as to timing because reference is made only to the need for regulatory clearance before completion. Unless I am very much mistaken, the latter does not include OFAC's clearance to proceed.

It might be thought by some, therefore, based on what has been stated publicly recently (including today) that the parties have decided to proceed with the deal, with or without an OFAC licence, comforting though it would be to have one.

I too spoke with Rupert Cole of XEL, on a number of occasions from about 2013 onwards. It surprises me he said to you: "there (are) no circumstances in which the company (will) not get funding and pay off the bonds". He was more circumspect with me, whilst leaving me in no doubt that what you state was his belief. Despite his clear shortcomings and previous record in business (which only became clear late in the day) he was well aware of what he could or should state publicly, or privately to individual shareholders. I was foolish enough to give merit to what he certainly intended me to believe and it cost me c.£300k (I held 500k shares when they finally went pop).

I came out of the experience better off materially than some, however, because I am the owner of an "Xcite Energy" golf umbrella which arrived unexpectedly a day or so after one conversation I had with RC, during which he'd asked me for my address to send me some publication or other. I've never used it - too ashamed.

After XEL I resolved never again to invest seriously in companies unless I could be certain of the integrity of the controlling director/s. My only present holdings are in SQZ, JOG and CLNR and when these have played out I'l exit the markets. I have 100% confidence in Andrew Benitz of JOG and TCW of SQZ. I have 3m CLNR because I'm an optimist and think it might turn out to be undervalued.

GL - al

"I smell something and it ain’t gas"................

.........might be what you wrote.............

No disrespect, but I've got a lot of experience reading statements made by people on discussion forums presenting things as facts when they are only opinions - and unsubstantiated ones at that.

The 'senor representative' with whom I discussed the situation SQZ was and still is facing could not have been more senior. He described the situation to me in a way that could not have been more balanced and he won my gratitude and respect as a result - I was already aware he is generally held in very high regard within the industry and I can fully understand why. I found him to be courteous, highly intelligent and understanding of the dilemma many shareholders were facing at the time, which was/is: should they de-risk by selling at least part of their holding until it became clearer what the outcome of the OFAC licence negotiations was and therefore was the BKR deal likely to complete as intended. It was he who explained the H&S issues and the difficulties that not securing an OFAC licence could cause in relation to equipment maintenance etc.

This senior person - I too am a senior person (in age, although not quite as senior as the one I refer to) - advised me that certain other senior shareholders (one a US national and the other an English married couple) had so far retained all their shares (as had he) and from what he understood it was their intention to continue to do so. He said he would not blame me or anyone else for selling because the outcome could not be guaranteed. As I stated in my last post, he told me that all parties were 100% focused on resolving the issues so that the BKR deal could complete within a timescale and on terms that were as close as possible to those originally envisaged. I did not press him for further information about the Company, nor did he offer any. The conversation was friendly but entirely professional throughout.

I have not at any point either stated or implied: "this is a no-brainer", mainly because it isn't. I said in my post that I am 'optimistic' and I gave what I described as "my view only", which was (and is) that: "it would not make sense (to me at least) for a junior like SQZ to sign-up to a deal if it could not guarantee the procurement of equipment vital to allow Rhum to operate as intended, so the balance of probability is that it won't go ahead without an OFAC licence".

I am not sure what you mean by: "I agree though, it makes no sense not to do the deal unless they expect to get everything sorted".

You come across as quite an expert. Many thanks for your views.

imo/dyor

........"The deal won't go through until this is sorted".............

..............this may be true, but I do know (from speaking with a senior representative of the Company a while back (out of courtsey to the provider of the info I won't name him - we spoke for nearly an hour on the phone) that the biggest issue was regarded at the time as H&S. Reading between the lines everyone on both sides of the pond (apart from Trump) was working on a solution and were hopeful one could be found. The fact the Field is so material to Britain's gas supply meant the UK Gov was closely involved in the negotiations.

It wouldn't make sense (to me at least) for a junior like SQZ to sign-up to a deal if it could not guarantee the procurement of equipment vital to allow Rhum to operate as intended so the balance of probability is that it won't go ahead without an OFAC licence. That's my view only.

It would be helpful if statements such as the one made ("it won't go ahead without a licence") were to be backed up by information that supports its truth, otherwise it might be thought the intent is simply to cause negativity.

I remain invested and optimistic a deal will be signed within the timescale indicated in the last RNS

GLAL

Maybe the current thinking is that the Ragnfried Nord drill could take a lot less than the 81 days was thought likely a while back (as published in the Norwegian Press). The main Verbier drill last year took less than a month - spud date 14 Aug; reached TD (4267m) 10 Sept. Does the WP pack any less punch (so to speak)? Pip and Bigfoot are both shallow water exploratory drills that could take 15 to 20 days each: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shallow_water_drilling

There are many uncertainties - as ever with oil because no-one can predict with any certainty what any drill is likely to result in.

The following statement in the recent CEO's statement seems likely to me to be significant in the context of the upcoming Verbier appraisal: "the co-venturers have approved the delivery of a fast track processed dataset volume from the PGS survey that overlays Verbier and Cortina which is scheduled for delivery in December 2018". The well location has already been decided but it might be possible the info that's been fast-tracked will be be helpful in determining which way a sidetrack should go.

There's about 5 miles between Verbier and Cortina.

I doubt JOG will be saying any more about the drill date until it can say with any certainty when it is actually likely to happen (this can only be when the second of the three UKCS drills has been completed and the WP is on its way to Verbier. RNSs cost money and the directors don't seem the types to waste shareholders' money by providing constant speculative information about a date that doesn't really matter much in the overall scheme of things. They info they're working on is provided by Equinor, which must have estimated (and told JOG) how long it thinks the drills might take. My take is that it might be towards the end of Q4. I won't be either surprised or disappointed if it's a bit later. The main thing is that when the appraisal well is drilled Equinor (as the operator) will have the best information it's been possible to secure ahead of the drill.

The indications are that the co-venturers think P2170 has enormous potential. I hope they're right. If people want to trade short term ahead of further announcements - or sell on negative vibes because the drill dates can't be precisely defined it's up to them.

I'm sitting tight and even hope to add to my holding if I receive a postal order from my elderly aunt in Paignton (the one who used to run a post office there) or I come up trumps on one of my Saturday 'lucky 15s' with BetFred.

Patience is said to be a virtue.

ifuwfm

http://www.veruspetroleum.com/

"Verus Petroleum has announced today 20 September 2018, that it has signed a Sale & Purchase Agreement (SPA) for the acquisition of Cieco Exploration & Production (UK) Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of ITOCHU Corporation.
The consideration is $400 million (USD) with an economic date of 1 January 2018.
The acquisition includes a 23.1% interest in the Western Isles Development Project, a 25.8% interest in the Hudson field, a 2.0% interest in the Brent Pipeline System, and a 1.2% interest in the Sullom Voe oil terminal"................

......................either Verus Petroleum (VP) forgot to mention CIECO's 12% interest in Licence P2170, or Itochu Corporation IC) has decided to retain it.

If the SPA excluded P2170, the $400m IC is to be paid on completion would be a useful contribution towards whatever it might take to tempt JOG's directors to sell JOG's 18% when more becomes clear :-)

If, on the other hand, VP forgot to mention P2170 in the assets acquired (or perhaps didn't think it was worth mentioning) then JOG has a new partner.

My money's on the former. I expect we'll find out soon enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv4CXIRs6Ec

PS - you forgot to explain how NPV works. Please help us understand.

You're a hoot - .........so you're not running anyone down by entitling every post 'dickuphim'.When you change your tune I might consider reapplying the filter so that I don't have to read your drivel and I can go back to just ignoring you. As I have already said, your posts are worthless - worse than - because they are generally also offensive. If I knew and understood as little as you do about everything I'd be more inclined to crawl into a corner and hide than bellow my worthless opinions at the top of my voice on an internet discussion forum.

You have insulted or otherwise offended many genuine holders here for a long time. You have also persistently lied about shorting JOG - no shares are available to borrow, as attested to by the likes of IG Index. You have also libeled the directors on a number of occasions, effectively labeling them as dishonest. You should be ashamed. Anyone with any sense of morality would be.

Apart from the above you're probably not a bad bloke. I expect your mother likes you. Someone must - perhaps your English teacher - he or she must be mighty proud.

GB - shortly after you swallowed "Fowler's Modern English Usage" you wrote:

"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 with cash left after drill bottom end is 40 mill ? so share price about right ? or have they put in next printing of shares yet in sp ? so like a,b told me its a 50,50 on results".

Can you do us a favour please and run a slide rule over the NPV calcs? How does it all work - can you explain so that I can improve my knowledge?

I thought you said our leader was wearing £35 trainers. To tell the truth that alarmed me and I considered selling before calming down a bit when I worked out he probably runs to work and back every day to keep fit. Had you said £70, I probably wouldn't have given it a second thought had you said they cost, for instance, £70 because my rich pal who said he'd visited the Company's offices (opposite the bus station - I now realise he must have been joking about the lift - he's like that) described our leader as a fashion icon (he was wearing a yellow tie when my friend met him) and I'm told it's quite normal for such icons to wear expensive trainers.

You say my posts are long to prevent others expressing their opinions. Tell us how that works, GB. My posts are generally longer than average because I always try to back up what I say with reasoned explanations where I'm able to provide them. I try to avoid making statements I can't support. Anyone is free to post whatever they want (subject to LSE's rules) regardless of what I might have to say.

If you don't mind me saying, I find your posts totally worthless in content. You seem proud you've proved the Company exists. Many congratulations.

Do you understand things any better now?.

You've become quite funny, gaybird. So much so I've decided to cancel the filter. You're too good to miss.

I don't doubt for a minute you went into JOG's offices but am puzzled about your knowledge on the cost of trainers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaG5SAw1n0c

."do you think jog price should be about 350 ? yes it should but if the markets have factored in next funding of another 22 mill shares then maybe we are at right price for what oil is about now?".....................

.............crikey, you've suddenly become literate, graybird. Anyone would think you haven't been being genuine............
You've certainly changed your tune on this company...........and the man wearing the trainers............

"JOG more spin 31 Jan '18
soon all cash will be gone ,verb no good ,print more share,s price drop to ten p, no assets been brought , jog directors full of yarn ,as long as they get paid at pi s expense they dont ever care about share holders and dont tell me they do ,ive seen a few oil firms do the same as jog"

You appear to be slightly limited in your understanding, PP.

I didn't cover everything in my last post but one reason might be that the number of shares in issue has more than doubled since the price was £3+ . The market rarely gives credit for the increased assets, or for the stronger position, a company finds itself in when funds are raised.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'd stick to companies like UKOG - should make you a fortune. Have you looked at FRR which is another good one?

JOG is under pressure because short term traders of small parcels of shares are setting the share price. Otherwise JOG is under no pressure at all except to perform when conditions allow it to do so.

Short term traders move in and out of the stock depending on their perception of any given situation on any given day. If they perceive something isn't good (eg a delay that doesn't make a blind bit of difference in appraising a discovery ) they sell. Most haven't got a clue about anything, but this doesn't change much - they're free to do whatever they want because markets don't distinguish between long and short term traders/investors and they help make a market in the shares when there might not be one. Small volumes disproportionately affect the price, esp when there aren't many shares in issue.

And there will always be a few longer term investors who want to sell a few for whatever reason - they might want to double the size of their house which is big enough anyway, or maybe go to Honolulu? That said, they might sell a few SQZ instead - they've done well. All depends on their personal circumstances and individual holdings. Not sure what they'd do if they'd picked up a pile of JOG at between 8p and 15p - that would be a difficult one. If they had they might be called visionaries rather than t*rds. Who knows?

Talking of t*urds, market makers have to make a crust and are non-judgemental. If there are more sellers than buyers they mark down the bid until buyers tempted by value start to take up up the slack. Market makers have to balance their books - they shouldn't go either long or short in a stock unless it's a normal part of their market making activities.

The bigger holders can't be expected to just keep adding but as more investors become aware of the possibilities JOG offers, slowly the number of longer term holders should increase and from there it's just a question of what 'jumping off' level they set. I'm in for the duration personally but it doesn't meant I'm right.

Most of the shares in JOG are held by a limited number of investors holding a decent number of shares (institutions, directors, their families and at least one nutty-walt type who see JOG maybe getting to a market cap of close to £1bn within a few years). These have taken their positions and are content to wait for the fundamentals to play out. In this case it is confirmation (or not - one always has to consider the possibility of failure) that there are 'prolific' reserves not only in Verbier but in many other different locations within the area covered by licence P2170, which comprises Blocks 20/5b and 21/1d.

The fun comes (with only 22m shares in issue, the majority of which are tightly held) when there's a game changing announcement and everyone wants to get in. I and a lot of others won't be selling them my shares. The term 'loaded catapult' comes to mind.

Price is what you pay; value is what you get

frau

............"My post was simply an observation, given Ukog are a company looking to add to their existing portfolio, assets with potential!"...................

............yeah - and a very silly one at that.

The risk (with enough shares issued to give one to every other person on the planet)? You get parted from your money like everyone else who's bought all the claptrap from Lenigas and the kind of people he puts in place to peddle his wares.

There's a term: "born yesterday"..............

UKOG and JOG could not be any further apart and if you don't recognise that you shouldn't be investing.

contd:

.................and important results that will condition how work on the discovery and wider P2170 licence proceeds subsequently. We expect the shares to rise in the coming months as drilling approaches.

Buy, 330p target.

Plse check your inbox today, A1.

Arden Ptrs - extracts: 20 September 2018

"Jersey Oil and Gas* (JOG LN) – H1 2018 results

Buy, Current Price 170p Target 330p

Key Points: JOG has released its H1 results, reporting a cash holding (zero debt) of £22.1m for the end of June, from £25.4m at the end of December 2017. This continues to leave the company well funded for Verbier appraisal drilling and potential subsequent activity. Timing of Verbier spud is reiterated as mid/late 2018, in line with our expectation of December 2018. We expect the well to be the focus for the stock in the coming months. There is also news that fast track data covering Verbier and the Cortina prospect from the new 3D seismic is now expected in Q4 this year, followed by full survey data in Q2 2019, helping maintain momentum on P2170. We maintain our P&L forecasts, adjust our cash holding for CAPEX timing, and our valuation (below). Verbier drilling is becoming increasingly proximal, and we maintain our Buy recommendation and 330p target.

Forecasts: We are leaving our P&L forecasts unchanged. In our cash flow, we are moving some of our Verbier drilling CAPEX from 2018 into 2019 given the expectation around timing of operations. This increases our end 2018 cash holding from £12.1m to £15.1m, though end 2019 cash holding remains at £4.1m. We currently allow for a P2170 exploration well in our 2019 CAPEX, though we don’t expect any confirmation of this until after Verbier appraisal drilling and, probably, the full results of the new seismic.

Valuation: We adjust our valuation for a change to our Brent oil price assumption, moving 2018 from US$60/bbl to US$70/bbl, and 2019 from US$60/bbl to US$65/bbl. We also increase our long-term Brent oil price assumption from US$60/bbl to US$65/bbl (real). We increase our UK gas price, with our long-term assumption rising from 42p/therm to 48p/therm (real), and also take greater account of confirmed CAPEX. Total risked NAV moves from 329p to 331p, and total unrisked NAV from 886p to 987p. We retain our 330p target price.

Conclusion: The results show JOG continuing to be well funded, covering Verbier drilling and potential subsequent activity, in line with our expectations. We are pleased to see reiteration of the Verbier drilling timing guidance, though again this is as expected. The fast tracked seismic is a positive surprise, helping maintain momentum of work on P2170 and at a higher rate than previously, and creating another catalyst for the shares when these results come through. Verbier drilling remains front and centre for JOG, representing a drilling catalyst towards the end of this year, and important"

Royscott re: "I too am disappointed they seem to have lost the hunger for an acquisition"...............

Why do you say they've lost the hunger for an acquisition, RS? Did you read the same RNS as me? It was surely about what was said between the lines?

I think the point AB was making is that at the prices the kind of assets JOG is interested in are currently changing hands, JOG would have to raise money in the market to enable it to compete. JOG has been pledged RBL support by a major bank to make acquisitions that stack up, but RBL wouldn't provide all the money and JOG's present cash balances are committed to the extent of about £17m on Verbier and Cortina, which only leaves about £4m and this is needed for some degree of working capital comfort. To buy income producing assets now would mean raising more funds at the wrong price at longer term net cost to shareholders.

It might look as if they're betting the ranch on P2170 but that's just the way the situation has developed and there's not much that could have been done to avoid it without giving value away. P2170 just turned out to be a great assets in one of Trap Oil's drawers when they reversed into the cripple. Bidding for (and winning) P2170 in the 28th Licensing Round was about the only half-decent thing MG-G and Collins ever achieved in Trap (good name - it trapped me to an extent that made me uncomfortable). They'd gone before anyone knew anything about the Licence they'd bid for and won. What it is to have a 'value investor' involved, pushing people around and threatening them with their jobs if they don't do as he says. PoS

I didn't want to end up with shares in an out and out explorer either There's some comfort to be gained from the fact one of the world's most respected majors fought off stiff competition to farm into P2170 and fast-tracked Verbier for (successful) drilling. It has since invested in up to the minute seismic mapping of the wider licence area and we all know what's happening at Verbier. It doesn't matter when the appraisal finally takes place except to the extent the market always marks down shares where there is any uncertainty.

Cortina is a prospect, btw - Meribal is still only a lead.

In response to your post last night, I have no doubt GB did visit JOG's offices in Jersey. My earlier post wasn't aimed at him. Before cheering him to the rafters, it might have made sense for you to look at his posting history and read his litany of illiterate and libelous posts, many aimed at directors who have done ex Trap Oil shareholders like myself proud.

Good on 'em. I hope they go on to become very rich as a result of their well directed (so far!!) efforts because it it won't do me any harm either (or should I say my kids and theirs because I'm unlikely to need it).

Everyone's uninformed except those who are paid to know.

I'm looking forward to February. Or whenever.

imtuo - gfy

GB - my rich friend (he's got more than 2500 shares) said the oil director's nickname in the office is "Davy", not that they call him names. He (my rich pal with all the shares) told me it's because he's got 3 ears (I have no idea why they would call him that by the way). My friend has never lied to me before and it would be quite unusual to have so many ears, so I thought the director you saw might have said something.

Was he right about the lift?

I didn't know directors were allowed to talk to shareholders so at least I've learned something useful as a result of your visit. The bloke you saw was probably grateful to you for calling in and sharing your business wisdom with him. It was very good of you. Thank you on behalf of all shareholders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaG5SAw1n0c

Gaybird - I've just seen your post and I have to admit I found it very exciting. Take back everything that's been said about you, you're defo on the button.

You actually saw the man? Talked to him? Is he as tall as they say (as close to 7ft as makes no difference?) Did you notice the door heights had been raised six inches in the office so he doesn't keep banging his head? Does he really have long grey beard and wear braces. Was he wearing a sparkly tie of the kind shown here: https://www.ebay.co.uk/bhp/irish-tie?

Are their offices as swanky as I've been told they are? Never mind the offices, a bloke I know who's got a big holding (more than 2500 shares) and has been there told me the lift is easily big enough to fit the two settees and an arm chair they've put in there (plus a 55in TV with SkySports on all the time). - with a lot of room to spare too. Wilton 80 oz twist pile on the floor he said. . "Wow " I said, - it's impossible not to be impressed. I'm hoping to see it all one day but as I don't live in Switzerland I suppose it's unlikely.

One other thing, gaybird, although I doubt it's true: did you meet the oil director? It would be a bit of a coincidence considering he's always on the front line looking for oil, but my rich pal (the one with more than 2500 shares) said he has three ears. Has he? My pal said he's got a right ear, a left ear and a wild front ear. He said they call him "Davy" in the office. I don't believe him personally - too much of a coincidence.

By the way, which hand did AB use when he shook your hand? Were his trouser legs rolled up did you notice?

It's a relief to learn that Verbier's on schedule. I can start planning for Christmas now. I was thinking of going up there to watch it all. Should be quite interesting.