Member Info for dougb189

Post Altag’s explanation & Now looks like turnover at
c.$3.5M / month & increasing.

Some analysts then have mid to late summer as in profit,
which then suggests we can start using PE ratio scales.
Currently evaluated on PS the price-sales & approx at 20% of our peers.
Some good steady production results will see a change in sp.

?1. Jan WTI avg.$77 x 1070 bopd x31 =$2.55M?
less the put option x750bopd.

?2. Feb WTI avg. $77 x 1275 bopd x 28 =$2.75M
less put x 750

??3. Mar. WTI avg. $74 x (calc.avg. 1500bopd) x 31 =$3.44M?
less 750bopd@Put

A possible saving up to $1.1M on any hedges.
Put / bbl ?

Thanks Altag, is a bit clearer.
Any ideas on what the costs are for each barrel with a Put ?

AM was previously okay with answering queries on the various financial instruments.

It only needs ONE respectable Pi, who has not sullied AM’s name, to make a polite request for an explanation of the Puts Options.

Lol.. That rules me out then.

The Put option will be owned by the securities issuer who then has the right to sell at the pre-arranged price. Cannot then see them losing out on what is now $20 a barrel mark up… ?

Thanks Mr.S., but do try check those figures.

I ended up wandering around the garden muttering to self “..have the BH got any of their funds ‘secured’ against hedges..??” whilst trying to work out any optimal timings for an RBL.

Purely guessing but reckon that the current Put options till June 30th would have to be honoured but that those WTI Future options, starting July 1st, would be cancelled ? For me that is a good ‘pivot point’ for an RBL. The JV could though come earlier.

It kinda also tied into thinking that the next 10 weeks then sees further concerted effort by AM to better define the reserves. Which I believe he is now getting on top of, primarily coz it’s now bikini weather on the Wyoming plains.

Then leaves the MM’s & the ii’s having to fairly quickly put a decent value on this.

Within 2 months we could be inching up towards 2500 bopd and if say a PE 5, would then see us c.£300M. The sp is influenced by effect of bonds etc, & reckon the 6.75p warrants will certainly be exercised (giving further strong support field developments) so perhaps with just under 500M share float, it could indeed be c.60p

Pg.10 with the Jan 01 to June 30 WTI Put options of 135,750 bbls at $60

Suspecting that by June 30th we should be clearing past 2500 bopd,
which with the above Put options, & the WTI at $80,
then sees us clearing c.$5.5M a month, generating $66M for this year.
Triples our current mc & we should also be starting to look at PE,
(Guessing starting maybe.. PE 3 up to PE 5, to begin with ?)
July 1st and the next batch of Future options,
then start to dig a wee bit into revenues.

https://www.sedar.com/GetFile.do?lang=EN&docClass=7&issuerNo=00021327&issuerType=03&projectNo=03515516&docId=5390526

Should start to see positive benefits coming thru from restructured hedge.

2022 WTI avg. $94.9 x 1090 bopd = $37.75M (c.$36M to COPL)
less 2022 hedges, so each bbl -$35.83, then gave funds of c. $23.5M
Royalties etc are set against the initial figure. Ouchhh.
A loss of c.$13.5M on oil prices, gives an idea of what any RBL could be offset against.

2023 looking more positive :
1. Jan WTI avg.$77 x 1070 bopd x31 = $2.55M
less hedge (60 x 750bopd = $45K/day) +
Unhedged (77 x 320 = $24.6k/d)
$69.6k x 31 = $2.15M to COPL’s funds, pre taxes.

2. Feb WTI avg. $77 x 1275 bopd x 28 = $2.75M
less (60 x 750 = $45K/d) + (77 x 525/d = $40.4K/d) = $2.4M to COPL.

3. Mar. WTI avg. $74 x (calc.avg. 1500bopd) x 31 = $3.44M
less (750bopd@$60=$45K/d) + (74 x 750/d= $55.5k/d) = $3.115M to COPL.

Assuming an average March bopd of 1500,
then looks as if we only lost $1.12M to hedges in Q1,
As apposed to the c.$14.25M lost in 2022, close to $3.5M lost each Q.

4. April appears to be off to a good start with avg WTI at $80/bbl

Some analysts have 2023 pegged at turnover c.$66M
(Significant figure if AM goes solo..)
Then requires $5.5M / month or $183k/d
$183k/d less $45K from hedged 750 bopd,
requires $138k from say WTI $80, so 1725 bopd unhedged,
Or c.2475 bopd at $80/bbl.

Could possibly set a time scale for achieving an RBL.. July 1st?
To hopefully get rid of those hedges, failing which AM then needs to ramp up further the bopd.

Pilot., operating netback will hopefully exceed the $44 highs we saw in the previous Q4 2021.
With 2022 at an avg operating netback of $20.6 this was then low as per the avg hedged $38 on each bbl. Was then hedged c.1050bopd at $57, so hardly any barrels sold at mkt price,

AM then needs to be producing above 2022 avg 1090bopd.

We appear to be c.20% above that already (Feb fig.’s) & allegedly near to a 60% increase (mid-March) but only on the most recent production “quotes” (nowt yet confirmed) and with revised 2023 hedges, then hoping we can see similar highs to Q4 2021 if not even higher.

He needs to start generating.

There’s obviously a significant problem currently; the main BH have only just slightly increased their ‘ownership’ holdings but have now deemed it necessary to use their status to now take a management position. The ill-prepared RNS’s given to the UK market as per February’s update & resultant 65% mc loss will have impacted on any BH’s strategies.

But for those with serious skin in the game ie c.$37.4M of BH unsecured loans & $44M of SL secured loans, how do they envisage a new board ? And suspect that yes, they know AM’s skill-sets as a senior manager are indeed dire, but that as a field technician, he does carry slightly better kudos. The cluster f**k that saw RS & AM both formulate X thousand bopd from their office desktops, whilst neither had picked up on the B&Q plastic tubing in the field, will have knocked further on that kudos. The end result though is that SL & BH are both prepared to put additional skin in the game which then suggests they won’t have the board interfered with.

Is true that AM has never met any of his current legal obligations towards the shareholders. With the dire state of the finances though eg. Q4 $3/bbl netbacks, that legal obligation is perhaps very close to being transferred to secured lenders. And yet they are not creating waves.

The Pi’s would benefit most from a TR1 (in addition to some decent bopd flow figures).
To try achieve a TR1, the Pi’s would need to put together > c.8.5% to then out-vote the boards previous access (c.3.5%?) as at last year’s AGM and to then notify of an intent to vote against AM just to induce the BH to play their hand; they would then need to gain > 5% (+3.5% from board) shareholdings ie. a TR1 status, to then out vote any Pi resolutions. Any holdings by Pi could see a resolution getting posted for the AGM but less than 3.5% will see the board override it & any Pi holdings less than 8.5% will just see some conversions again being ‘quietly’ held. Over 8.5% will then need a player with 5% or more, to then carry the board’s resolutions. A TR1 would benefit the Pi.

Would agree there’s lots of good buying, would even suggest that the £128k at 17:06 was the spread-bets accounts with strong probability of some shorts closing, the -1,000,000 & -500,000 trades seemed to have cropped up after the sp rose in early trading, with at that time no significant buys being seen & for which the 62p was then the purchase price & is the reported price for the 17:06

Wouldn’t agree that we are out of the ‘ongoing concern’ stage, as the Report financials were simply quite horrific but that we do still have strong support from both the SL & BH.

Similarly there is still quite a way to go yet prior to a full delineate with the original 6 to 7 FD wells barely scratching the full possibilities. Had a full delineate been carried out, we would then already be in bed with any prospective partner. Do reckon though that IF we have achieved c.1700 bopd as an average for March, which is a very good result, that AM will then revert to Atomic Senior’s m.o. & that we may yet again see field flow results being published 2 weeks after the end of the month instead of as the last day available, which was AM’s input the moment he realised that Mr.T had sussed out where to find the flow logs.

2 separate origins, neither of which imv are BH
JBER buying at 6 & selling at 7.5

The 1st looks from Europe desk:

13:24:17
6.05
GBX
1,000,000
60,500.00
Off-Book
P
Venue Of Publi….. ECHO
SINT
(Systematic Internaliser)

The 2nd, from London.

14:29:50
6.10
GBX
1,000,000
61,000.00
Off-Book
P
Venue Of Publi...XLON
XLON

Perhaps relevant is AM’s ocd for the delineation of his fields.

As in the North Sea, he threw everything at obtaining a clearer view of the field status. A figure of slightly above 50% success rate from lots of exploration wells, is vaguely remembered. Chasing the Fed Deeps & either 6 or 7 wells, so could be you are correct BM with the two timeframes, both falling within the next two months. That then ties in with the breathing space that SL have given.

Is that current production BM ?
as I think Q1 comes out late May..

Some seriously talented scientific players on COPL’s ‘sister’ bb (with its ops a wee bit north of Oz). Interesting reading.

Lol. Then remembering that other great scientist, possibly the brainiest person on the planet at that time, Sir Issac Newton and his dalliances on the stock market. Almost exactly 300 years ago & the South Seas bubble pops up, with Sir Issac then initially clearing £7000 profit and at which point he cashes in. The bubble though, keeps bubbling & Sir Issac gets enticed by the crowd & jumps back in. The loss he then took was reported to be £20,000 or £3M in today’s money.

He apparently stated that he ‘was able to calculate the heavenly movement of the stars but was unable to fathom the madness of men’.

As some of today’s top traders will quote, it ain’t our brains that successfully play this game, it’s our attitude and having the discipline to calculate the risks & to set the stop-losses.
And being unemotionally attached when telling AM that he’s a ****.

I don’t think there was a separate release, BM..
From memory this I believe was similar to the previous year
ie Q4 2021 was wrapped within Annual Report.

MDA Page 8 gives Q4 figures :

https://www.sedar.com/GetFile.do?lang=EN&docClass=7&issuerNo=00021327&issuerType=03&projectNo=03515516&docId=5390526

Thanks Mr.S on update from Cathy, appreciated.

Any adult joining the current board has to be good news.
More so, that he is then representative of $37.4M of almost unsecured funding.

Not that convinced that seeing the whites of his/her eyes will enhance further my holdings evaluation. Looking forward though to hearing how you poured that pint over Captain Ahab…

There’s a minimum of 28 days required if ‘electing’ a new board member.
Same will apply to any ‘grandfather rights’ ie. a holder with x%.
And guessing that Mr. Howard will then deputise a candidate.
Then allows the existing board to assess suitability.

Then looks like a very strong positive, that main BH are indeed committed.

Peeps need to chill with their lame attempts at bullying the less faithful.
The earlier opinion centred on a non-imminent JV, is most certainly justified.
The figures supplied though were not verified & look OTT.
One only needs to look at the current sp to confirm that nothing AM states is believed by the market. Was even recently highlighted the time-scale of 6 months which the SL have given to AM to then try push a JV &/or RBL over the line. It will hopefully happen but trusting AM’s word on any time scales is extremely foolish.

This has generally been a total cluster f**k, so own it.

Nice thinking outside the box, Lloydy., definitely a whiff of ‘scorched earth policies’ emanating from the east, with a view to overthrowing the $ & replacing with RMB. Can imagine there was some nice sweeteners thrown at Putin by Xi in recent visit.

Good time to be in energy stocks.

Suspect that Bladders was simply referring to AM having better discipline on his private comms ie ‘that he had passed up on divulging his usuals’ ?
Again hinting at an external influence…. An adult now being present.

Bamb’s correspondence most likely from Cathy which backs up previously reported emails ie, the RNS was focused on its title, that there was not the usual 4 for 1 RNS delivered.
Again pointing at a significant step-change in procedures.
Again pointing at an adult being present..