Member Info for dickupham

If JOG were to be wound up, shareholders wouldn't get a penny. That's just a fact. There's no credible reason it would or will be in any event - why is anyone suggesting it might be when it has recently confirmed it has sufficient resources to see it through to the end of 2021 without the need to borrow? There are many different ways for JOG to access funds for working capital purposes should the need arise, which would only be if there was no interest in what JOG has to offer, or the timetable should slip to a significant extent. None of these ways involves insolvency. Do people really think 142m barrels of discovered premium grade oil in a prime location in the UKNS is worth nothing? Ditto 200m+ barrels of prospective resources in the same area?

JOG continues to recruit people with the technical and other capabilities needed to bring its plans to fruition. Everyone within the Company is working flat out in a focused and structured way to achieve plans that have been meticulously put together, very well articulated and make perfect sense. That a few short term obstacles have been put in JOG's way is par for the course. These will be overcome by a very capable and experienced team, whose own financial success depend on a good outcome.

Sorry this post is so short. I've prepared a one sentence template for future ease of posting. It reads: "don't be so daft".

JOG's 2019 report will be out shortly. Hopefully people will take the time to read what's in there, particularly the CEO's focus on the future.

dyor

Not sure why my post should attract such an unfriendly response, Herron. I didn't intend to cause offence.

If one doesn't invest on the fundamentals (I take 'invest' to mean 'for the longer term') then what basis is there to invest in anything? I'm staggered you should regard JOG as: "grossly overvalued" with a m/c of £11m. How do you work this out? A few months ago (before the virus struck and MbS started behaving like he has done) a CPR commissioned by JOG put the NPV of JOG's GBA development project at US$1.15 billion. A mid-estimate price of $62.5pb was used over the life of the project, which is a lot higher than the current price of Brent, but the estimate used is hardly excessive over the life of the project. Most seem to think oil prices will revert to higher levels when conditions stabilise. A year is nothing in the world of oil and all the fundamentals point to a much higher Brent Crude price within a relatively short period when the backlog starts to clear.

I'm sorry you don't approve of my writing style. I try to communicate as effectively as possible but find it difficult to write in 'soundbytes'. I rely on research, an investee company's potential and performance, plus my assessment of the capability and honesty of those who run the show. I'm always happy to share my views with others but won't provide unsupported views. Risk (finance mainly) can't be avoided.

AIM might be a casino but this is mainly a short term feature. Seems likely to me JOG will be sold at an industry value. If someone tried to buy-in, the difference between retail and fair value would quickly diminish. JOG's shares are tightly held and there are few in issue. The same principles have applied the world over since time began. If you've got an asset someone else wants, there's a price that will probably buy it for you. If no-one want what you've got for sale, there's price someone will pay you to take it off your hands

You might find someone who's willing to sell you his JOG shares for what you think they're worth. All I can say is won't be me! JOG's SP increased ten-fold in a day when the Verbier discovery was announced in 2017. It now has discovered resources of 7x the (max) 24MMstb it would have owned had Verbier come in at the top of estimates, but according to the market (and you) it's now worth a fraction of what it was then. All because of short term trading conditions.

Any asset held for monetary reasons is worth today's value of all the net cash that asset will generate over its lifetime for the owner. It's called DCF to get to NPV. It's as good as it gets - better than any other valuation method if the assumptions used (over the asset's life) are sound.

You say JOG is at least 70 times overvalued by Rockflow Resources, based on their late 2019 CPR: Would they say much different (to $1.15bn) now? All depends on future price assumptions.

Another essay. Humble apologies. No-one forced to to read it :-)

GL

dyor

Greetings Herron

You've got me puzzled. Having sold your shares and evidently not intending to reinvest, I'm surprised you're popping in so often talking JOG's price down. You seem almost gleeful about other people's suffering. It's their hard-earned savings you're wishing away and I didn't have you down as that sort of person. IMO JOG's SP wouldn't be anywhere near as low as it is were it not Griffiths's disposal of 10% of the shares to a market that couldn't absorb them. There's been a constant overhang for months and I'm not even sure he's sold all his shares now.

Questions or challenges about specific arguments put forward by others, plus expressions of concerns about the industry generally are always to be welcomed, but people should at least try to argue logically, backing up with information that's rational and well-researched. This at least would be helpful to others. Sarcasm is an unattractive style to use when so many others are below the waterline but still believe in JOG's longer term prospects.

I failed to state the obvious in my last post, which is that whilst 50% of NS exploration opportunities are expected to be put on hold for a while at least, by definition the other 50% of exploration drills are still expected to go ahead as planned. So, on the face of it, oilcos run by industry pros who understand the industry a lot better than we can ever hope to still see it as worthwhile continuing to look for new discoveries. Why would such companies not be interested in sharing ownership of discovered oil in a prime CNS postcode?

As you say, JOG's oil will remain firmly underground for at least the next four years. I'm not sure what point you're making. Are you suggesting the climate in the industry will be the same, however long it takes to produce the oil? If so, I respectfully disagree it will be. This is simply my of opinion which in this case is backed up by the views of the EIA. Doesn't mean it's right, but it's a start.

Claiming JOG will run out of money before anyone shows any interest is probably a much better ploy to frighten people moving forward, but it's hard to see why it should come to this. Pencils will probably need to be sharpened somewhat when it comes to farm out time but there's plenty of margin to play with.

The whole of life involves risk. Those who won't accept it are destined to worry too much and they can't expect the enjoyment and reward an occasional measured risk can offer. Trying to spoil things for others the more timid regard as foolhardy seems churlish to me. I know that hope is not a valid investment strategy but occasionally it can pay dividends.

Guess you'll be the one in the corner sulking when the other attendees of the 125p celebration at the local "happy eater" tuck into the lavish all day breakfast menu (I've scaled down my expectations following your recent post) some time in the 2030s. I'll be dead by then so no real need to worry yourself on that score :-)

GLA

I've decided not spell it out any more clearly. People should be able to think for themselves and if they reach the the conclusion that oil prices are going to stay at present levels forever, then buy shares in Chinese companies because their goods will be even cheaper to produce and people in the West will continue to buy as many as they can lay their hands on because: cheap is best. Never mind the way the communist leaders treat their citizens and animals, or the foul and barbaric personal habits of some of the Chinese population. It's cheap, innit.

People will start driving their cars again and planes will again start flying. Oil will continue to be used in the production of more than 6000 products that are in everyday use around the planet until it runs out (estimated to be around the middle of the current century - ie in 30 years or thereabouts. Oil is finite and 16 of the world's 20 largest fields are said to be in decline.

By the time things get back to anywhere near normal, if the present assault on oil prices continues, a huge number of marginal producers (inc a lot of US frackers) will have gone to the wall - and a huge amount of expertise in the shape of experienced oil workers will have been lost forever.

JOG is well positioned to attract interest when it has determined a limited number of design concepts and opened a data room within the next few months. Oilcos may well have scaled back their spending plans and oil exploration activity may well he expected to decline by up to 50% in the next 12 months. But this isn't exploration activity.

As a final backstop, what do people think would be the industry's reaction to an advert placed by JOG in a publication like 'upstream' along the lines: "save yourself the 95% risk of exploration failure in the CNS by owning 100% of our low 30s API light crude that's already been discovered and most of it proven to flow. Plus another 200MMMboe of prospective resources in adjacent fields also owned by us. Price sought (because we're philanthropists and like giving away money) $1pb.

Work it out. In case you can't: 142m X $1 = $142m (ignoring the prospects) . $142m divided by 21.8m (shares) = $6.51 per share. Say: £5.

Won't happen. JOG won't pass into new hands at an uninformed retail valuation - it will happen at an industry one. The industry thinks long and reserves have to be replaced periodically.JOG fits the bill. It just needs an even break.

dyor

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-52446555

"OGUK chief executive Deirdre Michie said:..................If the UK is to maintain its supply of domestic energy, protect jobs and build the critical infrastructure it needs to transition to a net-zero future, ours is an industry worth fighting for."

In this latter connection there was a particularly interesting article in 'upstream' this month entitled: "Jersey sets its sights on North Sea 'power hub' ". 'upstream' is a subscription journal so I can't copy the article on here, but the gist of it is that JOG is leader in achieving zero carbon energy to bring NS oil into play. Many NS operators are finding it difficult to see much beyond the present carnage. Some, however, are fortunate enough to be able to look further ahead. JOG is one such oilco and is going about GBA project development planning in ways that could eventually help decarbonise oil and gas production in the UK North Sea. JOG intends to establish a new production hub in the GBA, which can be powered by electricity generated onshore and cabled over the seabed, rather than by conventional gas turbines. JOG also has a bigger plan to build a hub to supply electricity not only to its other owned acreage, but also to nearby platforms owned by others.

Changing tack slightly, I really do think the market has got JOG badly wrong. Of course there are risks but very few individuals seem to take the trouble to think about and understand what JOG's actually are. What it has has achieved to date is, to me, truly remarkable. And all for so little cost pb. Because there is an intention to find a bigger farm in partner to help develop its GBA assets, it seems there might be a tendency among the less well researched to think along normal "farm-in" lines. What normally happens is that an oil junior looks to find a bigger partner to pay for one or more exploration wells to be drilled in acreage the junior owns in promising territory. The oil junior usually cedes overall control to the farminee oilco, in return for the farminee "carrying" the junior's share of drilling one or more exploration wells. This ceding of control usually results in the farminee becoming the operator of the relevant field (or licence) - and therefore effectively making all the decisions.

What makes JOG's planned farm out of part of its GBA acreage fundamentally different is that there's unlikely to be any exploration undertaken because the oil is known to exist. So JOG can expect to be paid either in cash or kind, or a mixture, for whatever it farms out. In normal circumstances a farm in partner would be expected to meet the cost of an exploration drill costing on average something like $25m, when the chance of commercial success is (again on average) something like 5% - ie 19 dud wells for every commercial one) and then to fund the major part of the infrastructure.

I'll continue this in my next post.............

tbc - dyor

https://www.thebalance.com/oil-price-forecast-3306219

......if the dividend is cancelled the SP will tank. It will be lucky to hold 50p (cash value of the company). It's not rocket science (to me anyway). All sorts of negatives would be inferred by the market on the cancellation. Plus, the directors would have failed in their duties not to warn holders

I don't do predictions.........hope and prayer maybe........

Hope it works out well for all holders, whatever.

I'm not awake worrying by the way. The condition is known as 'BPH' and it's not far off a pain in the ar5e.

Don't get old.

Won't happen, NK. My take is that NIOC likes owning 50% of a big gas supplier to the UK, regardless of the sanctions by the US Govt (ie Trump) on its UK-based asset - ie: money due to NIOC is to be held in escrow until the UK Govt is told otherwise. Rhum is de minimis to NIOC - Iran is a troublemaker and it probably enjoys annoying the US (Trump in particular). If the other 50% had even been remotely available to buy, SQZ would surely have found a way to raise the money to buy it at something less than full value.

People in the USOFAC bent over backwards to make sure Rhum wasn't caught up in the blanket ban imposed on US nationals and companies from being involved in any way in the maintenance, repair or furtherance of any assets likely to be of any benefit whatsoever to Iran or its allies. To repay this huge favour by paying over to Iran the funds held in escrow, either openly or in some other way, without the express approval of OFAC would be an act of treachery on the part of the UK Govt, the OGA and any other UK-owned body involved in the deception.

I'd nuke the b*tards - might send out the right sort of message and cause a northerly move in oil & gas prices..............

dyor

........."The directors (as far as we know) have done a good job of reducing ppb for extracting the oil "..............I meant "gas".............

NK - a 1p dividend would result in shareholders being paid a total sum between them all of some £2.8m, when the two main directors are unlikely to have taken a reduction in their packages from the (approx) 2018 level of c.£500k each. Since 1 Feb 2019, SQZ's SP has fallen from 140p to today's price in the mid 80s.

Since completing the 'once in a lifetime' BKR deal, SQZ has hinted at making further acquisitions, but so far nothing has happened - which possibly has a lot to do with the turmoil the industry has been in for a while now. The directors (as far as we know) have done a good job of reducing ppb for extracting the oil and now has costs at impressively low levels. This has resulted in strongly positive cash flow, with a bank balance to match - possibly around the £120m level unless there's something I've missed. As far as I can tell, SQZ has managed to generate positive cash flow despite gas prices being at almost record low levels for a large part of the period under review. The general point is that, as things stand, SQZ is (apparently) not under any kind of financial pressure - nor is it easy to see how it might become so.

If there's an acquisition in the offing it would be understandable if the directors decided to retain a pile of cash to pay for one - or at least partly defray the cost if it's a sizable deal is being contemplated. I just can see why they would want to complete such a deal given the clear direction of travel to date, the make-up of the share register, the age of the principals - and a few other things on top. Why introduce more risk? Is being significantly dependent for cash flow on operating a half-Iranian owned gas field in the NS not enough.

To cut to the chase, I have no idea what level of dividend will be paid because I am not privy to the directors' plans. If it were me at the helm - and no deal was in the offing - my take would be that shareholders would be disappointed with anything less than 5p a share. Total cost £14m (immaterial in the overall scheme of things) and present SP well underpinned in difficult and unpredictable times by a dividend yield of c.6%.

JMO - Im probably way off the mark. Listen to what I have to say and do the opposite; then you might have a chance :-)

GLAL

dyor

PS a 5p div would more than double my OAP at a stroke. Bring it on...........luxury..........

LW (and others).........fyi. I posted the article on another board yesterday.

***********************************************************************
https://www.kitco.com/news/2020-04-20/Unfathomable-drop-in-Nymex-crude-oil-prices-suggests-futures-market-is-broken.html

.........."How can crude oil futures trade below zero? That’s a valid question being asked by those who are not familiar with the intricacies of the futures markets. Here’s what happened in crude oil futures today. The speculators who had been long the futures market were looking down the barrel of taking delivery of physical crude oil that they were going to own when the May futures contract expires Tuesday, and they had no place to put it. Speculators trade commodity futures markets with no intention of ever taking delivery of the physical commodity. However, it’s that physical delivery potential that is supposed to keep the futures market in sync with the cash, or spot market. Thus, the speculators were willing to pay to get out of that potentially disastrous situation of having to accept delivery of physical crude oil. On this day, a trader could literally not give crude oil away.

It’s likely some big hedge funds were caught on the wrong side of the crude oil futures market (long), and very badly. Last week, when oil futures were trading around $20 a barrel, the seemingly smart money was reckoning a quick U.S. economic recovery would push Nymex futures back above $25, or higher, in short order—just like the stock market had rebounded recently. Seemed like a no-brainer, right? Many of those “smart” traders on Monday were mortally wounded and a few will be forced out of the industry for good. There are a couple of old futures market-trading adages: “Markets will do anything and everything to frustrate the largest number of traders.” And: “Any time a trade seems like a no-brainer, you will likely lose your assets.” Both fit the crude oil futures market action seen today".

fyov

https://www.kitco.com/news/2020-04-20/Unfathomable-drop-in-Nymex-crude-oil-prices-suggests-futures-market-is-broken.html

.........."How can crude oil futures trade below zero? That’s a valid question being asked by those who are not familiar with the intricacies of the futures markets. Here’s what happened in crude oil futures today. The speculators who had been long the futures market were looking down the barrel of taking delivery of physical crude oil that they were going to own when the May futures contract expires Tuesday, and they had no place to put it. Speculators trade commodity futures markets with no intention of ever taking delivery of the physical commodity. However, it’s that physical delivery potential that is supposed to keep the futures market in sync with the cash, or spot market. Thus, the speculators were willing to pay to get out of that potentially disastrous situation of having to accept delivery of physical crude oil. On this day, a trader could literally not give crude oil away.

It’s likely some big hedge funds were caught on the wrong side of the crude oil futures market (long), and very badly. Last week, when oil futures were trading around $20 a barrel, the seemingly smart money was reckoning a quick U.S. economic recovery would push Nymex futures back above $25, or higher, in short order—just like the stock market had rebounded recently. Seemed like a no-brainer, right? Many of those “smart” traders on Monday were mortally wounded and a few will be forced out of the industry for good. There are a couple of old futures market-trading adages: “Markets will do anything and everything to frustrate the largest number of traders.” And: “Any time a trade seems like a no-brainer, you will likely lose your assets.” Both fit the crude oil futures market action seen today".

I read in the FT 2 or 3 years ago - might have been longer - that only about 1 in 20 forward contracts entered into on NYMEX & ICE involve the physical delivery/uptake of oil. If I understand the situation correctly, this is possible because all such contracts can be settled for cash.

We know that producing oil (and gas) companies use forward contracts for hedging purposes - ie effectively 'insuring' future production. But the number of contracts entered into for purely speculative purposes is never precisely defined. The answer would appear to be "a progressively higher number".

Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are said to control the oil futures markets, although they don't set the economic and trading conditions that steer prices in the direction they would naturally follow, were the said hyenas not to pollute these markets, always talking prices up or down to suit the positions they have taken in advance of giving everyone the benefit of their sage and independent views (as experts) in order to feather their own nests and those of their favoured clients. Hedge funds operate in basically the same way, although they usually spare us the insincere bull-caca.

The particular problem today (and tomorrow - the April contracts price of WTI promises to be another roller coaster) appears to be that the music stops this week and there's very little storage available for the US crude that's actually due for delivery - and what spare capacity there is has a cost per barrel attaching to it that comfortably exceeds what the oil is worth today. 'By how much' is the price being traded. This is uncharted territory, so everyone's in the dark and the situation is changing significantly in minutes and hours. Will Trump suddenly conjure up more storage capacity to help the frackers? Perhaps some sanity lies in the fact that July WTI contracts are trading at around $35pb, increasing in small quarterly increments thereafter.

I found the article linked in the next post generally helpful A question I would ask is: how much media time will C19 occupy in (say) 6-12 months time if the situation improves? Will the world still be closed for business, when our esteemed leaders realise the incalculable damage done to people's health that's unrelated to C19, some of this damage caused by the destruction of businesses and savings it took countless thousands a lifetime to accumulate? Best not to go there. Prices in commodities markets generally find levels at which supply meets demand. Oil prices have always been volatile, but the increasingly speculative activities of inv banks and hedge funds, with billions thrown into positions that are talked up or down to suit, has introduced more volatility still. Add the knee-jerk reactions of politicians (in the UK) more interested in not losing votes by continuing to pretend a dinosaur with a terminal condition is a very nimble animal and you've got a recipe for where we find ourselves today.

Independent article to follow

I see someone's still at it.............not sure why LSE doesn't seem to like showing afternoon trades.........
https://investing.thisismoney.co.uk/trades/JOG/Jersey-Oil-And-Gas.html

I'm not trying to cause trouble chinch - and this is slightly off-topic - but your comment about me doing well to to consider the effects of the so-called 'Spanish 'flu' a century ago was a bit off the mark. I am in fact reasonably well-read on the subject that's exercising us all at present and possibly have a better understanding than some about certain aspects of the pandemic and the reasons for the approach that's being taken.

I don't want to clutter up the board with my thoughts on the subject of Covid 19 and the way the UK organises (or rather: doesn't organise) its 'health affairs" so I'll simply refer you to two videos featuring Bill Gates - one from 2015 and one very recent. I have a feeling we'd all do rather better if someone like him was in charge of our health service. If the UK's present outdated, chaotic and ill-thought out health system isn't fundamentally restructured when the panic subsides, then everything that has been suffered, both economically and healthwise, by so many as a result of this new virus will have been in vain. I fear, however, that politicians will be too cowardly to take the bold steps that are needed, for fear of losing the votes of people who don't understand, are consumed by envy, like to refer to others as rich and expect them to pay for everything.

Politician across the world can't say they weren't warned: what he says is quite uncanny. No wonder he's worth $100bn :-):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Af6b_wyiwI

https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_how_we_must_respond_to_the_coronavirus_pandemic

...........finally: something truly rare: the BBC getting things in perspective:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654

LSE doesn't always seem to be recording pm sales of late. It doesn't seem (based on MM's reluctance to increase the bid) that last night post close 196k trade is likely to have left them short.

https://investing.thisismoney.co.uk/trades/JOG/Jersey-Oil-And-Gas.html

Note the 20k & 25k trades late on. One is definitely a sale and seems probable so is the other?

Looking forward to finding out who's still holding when the website is updated. Maybe it's a whole lot of different people who've been bailing as the price has fallen? wdik?

........my post wasn't directed at you, chinch. I respect your opinions - your posts are balanced.

Jmo but not sure pursuing cheap targets is what ACW and MF are aiming for. At coming up 80 and 60 respectively and with a former NED holding about 17% and the Hardys 10%+, it seems to me that what's most likely is an agreed takeover at a price that satisfies everyone. If either the US- based former NED or the Hardys were to decide to exit, unless they were able to interest an institution, how would they realise their investment and at what cost to themselves and other shareholders?

AIM is not flavour of the decade with institutions (or most other people with any sense). One way to interest them in investing in SQZ might be that it was full of cash and paying a decent dividend.

I'll leave it at that. Hope you and all other LTHs will get the rewards they deserve when things get back to something like normal - if they ever do. In the meantime a decent and easily affordable dividend wouldn't go amiss.

dyor

.........if the directors the share price to crash, I dare say they'll consider going back on the dividend pledge they made a few months ago.

Holders don't have be called Hardy to appreciate income from holdings like SQZ. There are no doubt quite a few who bought decent holdings in the teens or twenties. A holding of, say, 250k shares at 20p would have cost them £50k. A dividend of 5p a share would cost the Company c.£14m (out of cash reserves of well over £100m) and this wouldn't make any appreciable difference to SQZ's future strategy in regard to acquisitions.

There's a term: "asset rich - cash poor" which applies to many people of pensionable age. A dividend on the notional holding of 250k shares as above would provide a dividend of £12,500 pa, in times when a standard OAP is worth about £8k.

Feel free to wish away the income of others (and crash the SP in the process) as you dream about how you'd run the company if you were in charge and what your considered opinion is from your lofty perch. I can tell you one thing: if you were in charge, you wouldn't see me - or anyone else with any sense - for the dust.

flexmw - ref the directors and buying shares in the market, their annual income has now established itself at more than £500k pa each and they have been allocated as many soft or in the money options as their performance has reasonably justified. I am not being critical of them in saying this. The chances of us seeing them buy in the market are zilch.

dyor

.......hope it's as you say, vk, but the deal was executed at mid-price, which seems a bit odd if it's a buy in such a thin market. It might relate to a transfer into ISA or SIPP - or both? I'm just guessing.

https://investing.thisismoney.co.uk/trades/JOG/Jersey-Oil-And-Gas.html

One thing's clear: the seller (I assume) struck again just before the close with a dump of 25k shares. Will it never end? And will whoever it is never make the disclosures required by law? We should soon know if the seller is anyone who has to date been named as a significant holder, because JOG updates its website at the end of each quarter in relation to significant holdings and Q1 2020 ends tonight at midnight. I expect it will take a few days for the data to come through.

Let's hope the worst is over, but who can be confident ,with everything that's going on at present? These are strange times. China's going to have to buy a lot of oil to pay for the production needed to generate enough to pay the bills the rest of the world is going to be sending its way............

GLAL

Good to see a bit of buying interest this morning but, as I see the bid/offer has been shaved despite this interest, are we about to have another few lots of 10k, 25k or 50k shares dumped on us? Time will tell.

One fine day we'll wake up and he/she or it will be gone. Riddance I say.

Just for clarification, because some people may not fully appreciate what the directors are trying to achieve late summer onwards, the farm out they're looking for is nothing like the norm (when using the term: farm out). Junior oil cos usually look to farm out exploration opportunities to bigger fish (average chance of commercial success something like 5%) in return for the operator's ticket, majority ownership of the asset and a free carry on their (now) minority working interest.

JOG owns all but 100% of 142MMboe of already discovered resources in the GBA and a further 200MMboe of prospects in 5 adjacent licence areas.

What's happening now in the industry ("to the industry" more like)........ from massively reduced demand cause by C19 to the self-destructive "my richard is bigger than yours" antics of MbS and Putin, if it goes on for any length of time (which it probably will - C19 at least) is likely to result in significant cut-backs in production by the majors and to these companies (and many others both in the industry itself, plus the "supply" industry that supports everything). This will cause thousands of skilled workers to be laid off, and many of these will end up being lost to the industry for good (as happened in 2015/6 - Aberdeen resembled a ghost town for quite some time).

With fields shut in or pumping a lot lower volumes, it's not going to be possible to ramp up production to order - and there won't, therefore be enough oil to satisfy demand. We all know what happens next - oil prices escalate - which is probably what MbS is aiming to happen, having knocked the US off its perch as the new No 1 world producer. The US might not, however, like that and a few US supplied exocets launched by the US's latest weapons customer (Yemen) might successfully help MsB to smell the coffee (or indeed camel's ar5e, as the case may be).

First oil (second in the case of Buchan) isn't anticipated from JOG's licences until 2024/25, so this could well favour whoever owns the GBA assets at the time. The industry thinks long and it's reserves replacement the bigger cos are looking for.

Patience is the key. That's as I see the situation anyway. Clearly it will be more difficult to negotiate the most favourable terms in a depressed environment, but JOG owns 100% of a lot of discovered oil and therefore has a lot of margin to play with.

People should do their own research and reach their own conclusions. I don't claim to be right - it's just as I see things

yes.....dyofr and ryofc