The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
CaptainSwag - I still hold a position here myself and am sat on a loss from an average of 34-35p! It doesn't mean though that I won't give my opinion if I see news as being negative. I do intend to sell though and just take the loss - it is all part of the risk when investing in this type of company if things don't go to plan operationally, and I always invest an appropriate amount based on those risks.
I'm actually long and have been invested here for more than six months, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story... Anyway I will leave you all to it as clearly all those who have suddenly appeared on this board in the last 24 hours (not everyone as I know some have been here longer than me) and only seem to want to mention where the share price is going etc, and are just looking for a quick trade, have done far more research than actual investors have!
So how exactly would it help people if I posted a positive opinion of the outcome, when I actually believe the opposite? I have given my reasons for my view, including pointing out some of the bits of the CPRs upon which it is based - having read all of those at time I originally invested here over six months ago. I’m more than happy for you to counter that though with your own interpretation of those parts of the CPRs etc and what it means.
Fair enough and hadn’t watched that interview - I was simply going by what you can interpret from the maps which show the reservoir depth/contours and the OWC, which appears to show 80-100ft, but without a more detailed seismic map/scale gives some leeway in the interpretation of it. Quite happy to accept that 75-80ft was the target - which would have given net pay close to that amount I would have expected (based on the CPR net to gross being high at this location, pretty much 100%)
Nearly 10% of the shares in issue traded already today, along with large amounts yesterday. I don’t think anything that I, or any other individual, says at this juncture is going to have any sort of impact on the share price anyway. All we are doing here is posting opinions based on our own perception of the facts that we have available - so it is up to everyone to make up their own mind as to whether this outcome is good or bad, and whether it was inline with their own pre-drill expectations. I would expect that the actual pay here would be close to 20ft anyway if this part of the structure is inline with the net to gross achieved on the original well and mentioned within the CPR (higher net to gross here than at parts of Blake).
Average of 34-35p - not got fortunes in here as never take big risks on drills, it still annoying, even more so as had high hopes for this one based on the Liberator field and the fact it could quickly reach the production stage!
Bad in my opinion - the Captain Sands (note it is the whole of those sands not just the Upper Captain that we’re 220ft thick) are mainly below OWC down to the Valhall Shale. The 20ft mentioned is also oil shows and not net pay (like the original 2013 well was). Obviously there is guesswork involved but based on this, plus their revised seismic mapping, I would have expected 80-100ft of upper Captain here (above OWC) given they were drilling what was supposed to be the high spot. I hope I’m wrong but I suspect the whole model is out vertically - as was highlighted as a potential risk in the 2017 CPR - and a lot of the structure is actually below OWC. Although I probably should just keep my mouth shut until I am able to sell - I’m prevented from doing so until after the publication of an article updating my opinion on this one, so will probably end up costing me!
Reading the board over the past 24 hours it seems that surprisingly few people have actually read the CPRs and tried to understand them - especially in relation to Blake and the size of the oil columns found there. Also throw in the comments in the CPR about the potential for vertical discrepancies in the modelling, as well as the lateral ones they have already encountered. Plus taking the new modelling and plotting roughly where on the structure this well was drilled (500m north east of the previous pilot - allowing some degree of latitude for it not being exactly north easterly). From all of that people should be able to see why many, myself included, were somewhat less than impressed with mention of 20ft of indications at this location!
Hope they’re all SEC compliant now that it is also US listed and they have stricter rules on declaring any paid for PR...
Flow testing of Hammerhead and info on the type of oil present there - and how it compares to Jethro and Joe - will play a big part, plus whether or not Exxon go ahead and develop that. Sulphur content isn’t necessarily a problem - high levels of hydrogen sulphide are of course far more problematic though if that turned out to be the case here
Carapa result is expected before the end of this year, and given spud date I doubt we will hear much before then from that drill.
Did they not pretty much already know that sufficient water was present via internal assessments, but needed it confirmed by a third party as part of the stipulations towards getting a TEO - as per the statements within the interims?
Looks like most have taken positions either way and are just awaiting further news - virtually no volume today, certainly compared to what we have been seeing recently anyway.
The stock market and AIM in particular is as much about understanding psychology as it is actually understanding the financial side of things. Even more so when it comes to shares which are being pumped and dumped across various chat forums and private message groups - they want people to feel as though they are stupid to miss out on the opportunity and would be stupid to sell. It is all about creating herd mentality.
Doesn't appear to be as a result of that - previously the TR1 that related to the demerger stated that was the reason for the change in holding. There did appear to be a buyer recently - I'd assumed it was just shorts reducing but looks as though M&G were also buying.
Parsons is a director of C4, so would constitute a related party transaction if that company had any involvement in the Tendrara sale. I'm aware of Marco's background - just doesn't make sense to me that you'd chuck a load into a private company, rather than getting that listed and raising the bulk of it from the market down the line. The NUOG debt was £2.5 million, not £5 million I believe, and suspect that they got a very good deal from Shard when they bought it - would probably have been worthless otherwise as the company probably would have gone into administration.
The other party can't be C4 as it would be a related party transaction and would have had to have been declared within the latest RNS if that was the other party - I don't see how they legally could avoid disclosing that if it was the case. I would also be surprised if C4 had that amount of money anyway for an asset - surely the play will be to start of with something smaller (possibly even an exploration licence) and reverse into a listed company, then raise funds, not spend a fortune of their own money initially?