Member Info for G_G_G

Sadly a nothing update. Fwiw I think the sp is going to continue drifting downward as the days / weeks go by. From the update I cannot see the permit being awarded in the next couple of weeks and would be very surprised if it is awarded in the next month. Perhaps this quarter. That means a lot of frustrated holders if we're still waiting in a month and slowly this will edge closer to 4p in that time. It always happens with these things. If you believe the permit is going to happen then continue holding. I personally think it will, but who knows when. GLA

Tony, just to echo the words of other posters - thanks for your on-going contributions. Great research that shows we're under-valued not only on financial multiples, but also reserves. Hopefully mgt will really start to push these messages when they release the 2022 financial results in the coming days.

Out of interest, what would you estimate our value to be based on reserves and the peer group you've shared? GLA

The 5% today was driven by me Matador. Nothing in it other than I feel we're at v.good value when considering risk and upside. There may be a boost from the ISA allowance over the next week or so, but it usually isn't significant or last very long as it's mostly bed and isa investor activity i.e. little 'new' money. If news (good or bad) doesn't land for another month or two then we'll continue to drift between 4-4.5p. That's providing there isn't a wider economic meltdown. The 4p (£40m mcap) floor was hit due to the recent banking turmoil so I believe it's pretty strong. AIMHO GLA

Hi Shares, yes the gas price certainly isn't helping any O&G producers. Having said that we continue to be under-valued across virtually every metric versus the Canadian peer average. There is no reason for this to be the case, especially when we're better than average on virtually every metric. The yawning disconnect can largely be put down to mgt not pushing our story well enough over the past 18 months. They tend to only show their faces after delivering bad news as a sort of damage control policy, when they should be doing it all the time and especially when there's good news to share. We moved just over 15% from 52 week lows on the back of an incredible reserves report, plus appt of a new CFO. And this is while WTI pushed through $80. Really not good enough from mgt.

Pretty sick and tired of mgt doing f'all by way of publicity around good news... If they don't feel it's their responsibility to get us on investor radars then whose is it? At this rate WTI will be above $80 and we'll be back in the teens. It's really not good enough, especially when they have the opportunity to introduce a new CFO to the market.

There was a 1m sell at 20p that looked to take the wind out of our sails today. I wonder if we still have one of our f@cking IIs selling into the recent good news and poo strength...? As usual mgt not doing enough to promote their good work. More great news that investors don't get to hear about.

Meanwhile poo I see has just broken $80. Nice time to be dropping good news.

Could be one of those P&D crew jobs. Having said that you normally get a lot of new faces turning up when that happens.

Sorry Shares, I meant to say 'mid-20's'. Not sure we'll get past that number without a serious push up in both poo and some strength in gas. AIMHO GLA

Tony, I'm not sure anyone has said the 'for sale' sign is being put up. More that we now have a CFO with M&A experience plus an up-to-date reserves report that helps value the company on PDP, 1P & 2P metrics. That's all.

Interesting to note the recent Crescent Point acquisition was for 2P reserves of 206mboe. We're now sitting at 180m and growing. Not the best read across as there's a lot of things that cannot be compared. I have to say the acquisition was on brilliant terms for CP given the assets, their location, production levels, and perhaps more importantly the $1.6bn in tax pools. Still reckon we're worth 40p all day when compared on other metrics though. Hopefully over the next fortnight we'll see some more strength in poo, a good 2022 eoy financials result, plus a lot of PR. If all the ducks align we may even get back to the 20's. GLA

Sorry I forgot to mention the resource report is one of the most important valuation elements for any t/o as it allows the buyer to see how many years of reserves they have to exploit. Stas, I didn't realise Canadian resource reporting is amongst the strictest in the world, which only adds to the investment case. Thanks for sharing!

Very, very good reserves report. All that I could have hoped for. It would be interesting to get some views on how we stack up against the recent Canadian t/o from a reserves value standpoint.

And they have appointed a new CFO, which seems to have gone unnoticed. This is an incredibly important appointment and exactly what we need given his vast Canadian O&G experience, and M&A background. I would have preferred the announcements to have been separated given the importance of both, but it's done now and very good news. Combined with OPEC news, I should expect us to move above £250m Mcap (21.5p) again this week.

Now let's see mgt get out there and beat the drum!!! They've done some great work again, but they now need to tell the market about it. This is the final part of the job. And now is the perfect time to be getting noticed. GLA

Thanks Pete for another reason to develop more oil :) Hoping for a strong reserves update next week and a push back above 20p. GLA

Passer I'm not sure $30m is going to get us much of an acquisition. Personally I'd rather we focus on pushing the oil side of our portfolio, which is quite under-explored and developed. This is the easy money and value to be added. In doing this we also prove up the value of our existing acreage and make ourselves a far more attractive investment or target. I personally think we're going to be taken over in the next year or two. The value we get will depend on doing things like boosting oil production in the short term. Also, it doesn't appear that companies with small amounts of debt are penalized in their valuations. And remember I'm talking $30m, which would be on a future base NOI approaching $200m if we add another 2-3kbopd (oil) at +$75WTI.

Fwiw I do think gas prices will start showing real weakness in 2024 due to global over-supply and a lack of infrastructure for Canada to get their gas easily to US and European markets. So a gas heavy acquisition imo wouldn't be a great idea. And why go for an oil acquisition when we have huge untapped reserves and can produce at a better ROI. Anyway, that's my pov. Have a great w/e folks.

Re JOG, don't be surprised if new holders get a nasty wake-up rns in a few weeks. What many people need to understand is that being the 'junior partner' to a Nth Sea major means they will get bent over. Many PIs don't realize just how much can be given away in such a deal, and the fact the rns states a 'material interest' by the f/o partner being negotiated does point to the fact they could get left with very little. Great if you had some spare cash to throw in this morning but I'd be selling right now and taking my winnings. Anyway hopefully next week we're back to 20p. GLA

Tony the example you gave is of a company that is majority owned by PIs with little to no II involvement. The reason that it's pointless for us to vote is because anything of note that mgt are recommending would no doubt have been cleared with IIs who will vote in favor. So not the same thing imo.

As for more debt / equity to fund a slightly more aggressive oil production plan, it's fine for people to disagree. I was simply pointing out that Older's reasoning for no debt combined with poo being at a cyclical low don't support one another, especially when the aim is to drive near-term growth and valuation of the company. And if gas goes -ve in the near future (as per Nuttall's musing) then it's all the more important to drive oil production now because it diversifies your production base to the higher value commodity hence limiting downside risk. It was one of the many reasons I mentioned to more aggressively pursue oil production growth based on a small amount of debt i.e. $30m. Anyway, that's my well thought out position :)

Tony you know that IIs get the say on anything we do at a vote so it's almost pointless to do so. Emails yes. I haven't had that many responses from someone in mgt, but someone does normally respond and it is worth the effort.

Good debate folks.

Older, I think there's a flaw in your logic. I do indeed believe that oil is at a low for the next 2-3 years due to global demand growth, OPEC manipulation of supply, declining Russian production, SPR refills etc, which is precisely the reason I've been saying we should raise capital to invest in oil production.

I'm saying we should raise / borrow no more than $30m this year, which happens to make our net debt around $35m, but with a payback on +2-3kbopd in circa 9 months at WTI$75. This is what I call a very safe, yet aggressive growth strategy. It's the sort of thing that super-charges our earnings, puts little debt and stress on our books, and also opens up / appraises new areas that add reserves, value and greater probability for t/o / asset sale(s) / farm-outs. All for $30m. So your belief in a cyclical low for oil (that I share) is exactly why I believe a small amount of debt should be taken out and pointed at oil production. For those who hate the word 'debt' the other option is to issue more shares, but be strategic about your buyer i.e. get a well known Canadian fund on-board that increases liquidity and awareness / exposure in our second market e.g. Nine Point. They'll want a premium, which is why we'd need to issue shares in the low 20's, but I do believe our sp would re-rate on the back of such a thing. We'd just need to swallow a 10% divi hit for this year, but see it re-bound by twice as much next year. It's a long term strategy, which also means less risk amongst our IIs selling for f'all in a t/o, and if one decides to dump 5% of their position you have others who may be willing to buy it off them.

So based on this logic I disagree with the argument that we should have a 'steady as she goes' way of working. That sort of strategy is why we remain unknown, and under-valued versus peers. It also makes the prospect of a t/o in the mid-30's a very real possibility as it only takes 2 of our larger IIs to agree to the t/o for it to happen. I own 0.4% of the company and in the absence of an aggressive (yet safe) growth strategy I'd be inclined to sell my shares in the mid-30's as well. It won't matter if you or I think we're worth more, because it's the IIs that will get to make that call. Hence the safety of having another on the books, but you get a lot more than safety by raising capital with them - you get them to pay for multi-year growth. So we should get our hands on $30m, pump it into oil production (we have enough gas), and as we pay it back and grow increase the debt level to a maximum of $50m to keep the growth going. If we can get to 30kbopd with majority being liquids by end 2024 and have a maximum of $50m net debt on the books I'd be more than happy with this scenario. At WTI +$75 we'd be worth a hell of a lot more, have comparatively little debt versus earnings, have greater reserves across our acreage, would be paying more than .02p dividend out of pocket change. All for less than $50m. AIMHO

Firstly dilution of 10% is a lot different to the dilution events of the past. We also weren't generating the same amount of earnings on the last 2 x mega dilution events. So not a fair or reasonable comparison.

My main point is if mgt can't be @ssed driving awareness and investment in the company then they should be looking to do things that will add value and get investor attention. They can take on debt to super-charge oil production this year. Or they can strategically raise capital and do the same thing. The alternative is we continue for a few more years slowly increasing our production base whilst being under-valued versus peers, and end up missing the boat on +$75 oil prices over that time period. We have a huge amount of acreage that needs to be appraised and developed. And we simply won't get around to realising any value from it if we don't start super-charging investment in oil production. Debt or capital raise. Don't mind. I'd just prefer them to do something to change the massive value disconnect.

As for me cashing in my chips, definitely not yet. I get a tax free income here that's greater than my day job and it's a quite safe bet. I'd just prefer our base valuation to be in-line with the average Canadian peer at the same time. I don't think that's asking too much. AIMHO GLA

I take your point on today's depressed sp, but that's why it would make it easy to get a fund or II on-board. Personally I think anywhere in the low 20's could suit both parties. We've talked about taking on debt to drive growth. This is the other way. I'd happily live with both options to drive oil production growth in acreage that's still needing to be appraised. It's just the right fund or II jumping on-board e.g. Nine Point, would raise our profile in Canada and we'd be assuming less risk. I think poo will be quite resilient over the next 2 years so very happy with increasing our debt, but who knows what could happen next in today's topsy turvy world economy.