Member Info for dunderhead

SS tbh I have been 100% right for the past 2-3 years, which does uoset quite a few people of course? I think my best one and the one I was 100% castigated for (normally a "few" people agree with me but not this one!) was about 6 months prior to Casca finally starting production, when share price was in early 70's, I "dared" to state I felt, if there were no "management " changes post Casca, the share price would weaken. Of course this caused much mirth, similar "dark" accusations and downright rude insults from the confirmation bias club. Not one person agreed with me!! History seems to indicate different of course!

I do have some hope from here now but, let's wait and see how we finance the Shell acquisition, which as HLM points out is currently "borrowed" cash. I know I'd be far happier if this was 100% borrowed of course and at 4% costs, then I will sit (a little) easier.

Best of luck all, as ever IMHO and DYOR!!

SS apologies you have been here longer than me, lol!

Respectfully, at this point in time, you're never going to get a 100% positive post from me because, simply as ever, there are clarifications and convenient gaps in information provided from TXP or simply as well, the "market" doesn't trust TXP management, as exhibited by share price and investor profile, as short term traders exit this morning!! When the share price goes up, maybe you'll get your 100% positive picture but, I very much doubt it as the opportunity cost and management performance over the last few years has simply been awful, IMHO.

I continue to hold because I don't need the money and hate to be wrong, although in all honesty as above with opp cost I obviously have been but maybecwill see some return at some point in future!!

Best of luck all, as ever IMHO, DYOR!!

SS this is the issue here, someone posts up a "list of achievements" over the last year or years and gets 20 positive upticks.

1. They may or may not be?

2. I don't care, if they are "achievements" why isn't the share price higher?

3. As above, when will investors start to question why the share price isn't higher rather than back slap each other az to how hoid an investment this is and how under valued it us (for years!).

4. To repeat, the share price is all that matters!

5. I don't care whether you think I am a holder or not but again, it is always the case of being I must have ulterior motives of posting or perhaps just perhaps, I am a holder who is tired of all these supposed blinders / achievements and if indeed they are as such, wants to see some recognition of this?!

6. I'll bet I've been holding longer than you here as well, lol!

As ever all IMHO, DYOR.

SS genuinely respectfully this is my "concern" here, "taking" the contiguous Rio block, where I think the previous holder lapsed on WP, for standard new WP is the bread and butter of this business, absolutely nothing noteworthy or a "blinder".

Again the central block potential acquisition makes simple common business sense however, whether TXP has got it for a good price remains to be seen and, whether they can run it efficiently, also will be a genuine concern considering how they have "managed", planned, communicated to market and progressed / executed with Casca to date!!

Whilst I personally see potential good value, it is obviously very risky, considering the (market set) share price to date and lack of II's ever really being onboard. Ie it appears it is currently (and for last few few years only) retail investors that perceive "blinders" have been played and, the "real" investors (who matter) remain to be truly convinced of the quality of the "management " team and the business case is worthy of investment.

That is the worry for me!! We need II's onboard and the contjnual lack delivery in that regard must be seen as very important!! That is the true "blinder" that needs to be delivered.

As ever all IMHO, DYOR.

Wise Owl I said hopefully because if an II wants to come in and purchase 10% equity that in itself, in open market would send the share price flying, therefore you have to try and sell up at an average price for the illiquidity or high elasticity whcheverway you want to refer, of a stock such as this? That would be how I would position the sale, however countering that, are obvious reputational issues "here" also. IMHO. Of course it would be far far better not having any dilution at all though!

Again my point is and I sincerely hope I'm wrong on this,

1. If indeed this does require a placing, then surely better to wait until first qtr drilling done for the acquisition and build from there rather than this "great value" "self perpetuated / fulfilled" potentially lower position?

2. I assume a placing will be direct to II so hopefully at a premium to market price with a possible smaller issue to pis but if not to ii, what price placing?

3. I just hope that the more enthusiastic bunch here are correct and it can come solely purely from cheap debt.

4. Even then I am a little disappointed at the amount of money agreed for this, considering the "circumstances".

5. Anyway only my opinion and I'm well known for being "tight" (especially in the pub!) so best of luck all!!

I was trying to say you cannot deny management performance and subsequently TSR has been appalling to date IMHO. So to say this is an absolute bargain blah blah blah is not 100% certain as the very reason behind, as to why the share price is so "low". When explaining what a "bargain" this is, surely some appreciation as to why the share price is where it is, should be taken into consideration as well? If PB can get this with no dilution I'm "reasonably" happy but again, this is a meaningless asset for Shell and I'm not 100% sure how much of that has been levered into these negotiations as well? All IMHO as normal and DYOR!!

How anyone cannot deny investing here long term and the management performance to date has been lowest quartile, says something in itself and just exacerbates further, this ridiculous confirmation bias that has been prevailing here for years now.

I am the first to admit this has been one of my worst investments (but I do see some hope here now), however the path for a large amount of people to getting a profit from this is a long way away, IMHO and that in itself should be a big warning of risks involved. To not recognise and take into account why this share is "such amazing" value and "admit" that reasons for that risk still exist, is not a good sign at all, IMHO.

As ever, DYOR and best of luck all!!

Sturm see my posts on ADV with caveats of course!! This deal has been "mooted" for some time of course. I always wanted TXP to be paid to take it hut let's see how it goes.

Hopefully no dilution and abandonment covered !! Very bad access issues so can't post anymore.

Smasher why will LOL be kicking themselves re this deal do you think they had their eyes on it? Best of lhck all.

Why hold for another 6 months crl?

Yes supposedly a nice polished presentation but this is the same people who have wasted money and it would seem got to where we currently are, in a most inefficient incompetent manner?

So why will this change now?

Why haven't this polished team acted upon their own RNS post AGM, regarding shareholders concerns about the size of BoD?

I will continue to hold but I can "afford" to lose all my investment. Others can't or don't want to put themselves through the potential "misery" of holding here, which accompanied with current investor profile could potentially hold back the share price for god knows how long? Someone here pointed out that Rossann had been here all the way back complaining about the Casca placing? To be honest, looking all that way back, what has been the TSR since then, for "normal" shareholders?

As ever all IMHO dyor.

JM ah so post tax 4%.

I hope you've still got my channel named on Discord?!

I'm not able to get access at moment but hope to in next few days and may need a new invite!! It takes a bloody eternity to post with this phone, lol.

Is all debt at 4% taxable ir just that available for new dev wells ?

John oh well I was happy anyway for debt @ say 8% but 4% thats great. I hope that doesn't turn into a Gonzo fact though whereby the rate is this much but there are other "associated charges etc" but truly if in fact 4% taxable I'm really quite pleased and kudos to him for those rates.

JH is this what TXP is paying? I'd be very surprised if that were the case?

SS there is absolutely no need for a BoD of that size, let me be clear on that. I would say that is one of the many reasons we do not appear to have much of an II profile.

However let's put that to the side for the moment.

Stas I am not sure this is such a good thing anyway as they have made patently obvious that Casca is more than enough of a challenge at this time, IMHO but thanks for clarification, appreciated.

As I say all I care about is the share price and that is very very sick at the moment. All IMHO.

I dont watch these things anymore but don't like much conjecture such as owning Trinidad onshore because in fact they own nothing except the right to explore and produce and it kind of doesn't ring true with being for the locals etc etc however, as I say don't bother watching as simply the proof is in the eating of the pudding rather than talking about it.

All I care about is the share price and here's hoping it may be the start of the turn around from the recent appalling performance.

Any mention about board size etc?

Ok thanks because I'm assuming the purchaser will have more "power" to negotiate transfer to the relevant facilities than TXP?

Re Gas is that at wellhead and the purchaser negotiates with the transportation tariffs?

Alli / Trek /JH to be really clear yes PB "had" to go.

I was castigated and laughed at for saying this well over a couple of years ago based on the premise that there is a world of difference between an exploration success and bringing on line cost effectively and efficiently. I initially though the Discord group was a SHAG and actually a little late in that regard but whatever.

I was then castigated for suggesting he could be (only) "moved" say 6 months after Casca came onstream, as I felt the share price would be weak as a result of the management team at that time, remaining in situ.

However whilst I actively support everyone voting down the entire board at next AGM, now is definitely NOT THE TIME to replace PB WITHOUT consultation with the likes of Discord share holder group. We cannot have PB replaced with a similarly experienced individual and he now has a network "of sorts" in place in T&T which will have to be carefully transitioned, so absolutely no need for knee jerk reactions here but, I do think changes still definitely need to be made.

The main ones 100% being we should have 2 BoD equivalent based in T&T and this should have been crystallised post Casca discovery but better late than never.

As ever all IMHO and DYOR and apologies to some on here for appearing to crow. Let me be clear I am a holder and "hurting" just the same as some others. I have to shoot now and will likely have a few access problems so may not be able to reply to the inevitable criticisms!! Best of luck all!!

True colours SS, I am confused mate?

You were the uber bull before, castigating "doubters" and when I tried to caution you with that, I was a no nothing twat?!

What part of Wimbledon by the way, it's very nice there.

I have a mate who still works in o&g "c suite" level that lives there.