Member Info for Gassy

Good call emacd. I think investors are not going to be swayed overnight in a frenzy to buy. I have bought way too much. I thought yesterday’s call was pretty good and happy to hold. My only gripe was how Graham responded to the 25p question. That was not credible in my view. For the first time in a while it feels promises have not shifted back. Priorities pretty clear. I don’t buy into the H2 and power story. Ok overall.

Thanks

This board is going from bad to worse. Can someone explain the subject line? I clearly missed something - also no trades at all today as yet?

Looks like Sound is raising the bar and set expectations that there will actually be news to share. About time - looking forward to it!

Just had a look at the CPs. This looks like a sticky one:

‘Approval by Schlumberger in accordance with the terms of Schlumberger's profit-sharing deed in respect of the Concession or Managem negotiating and entering into an agreement with Schlumberger for the cancellation of the profit-sharing deed;’

Any views?

Suggest you stop giving them oxygen. I suspect they have an incentive from putting in some time and may have a vested interest in seeing Sound go down. I recently used my filter for the first time (on Kylie and Pescado). Highly recommended !!

LSE just being prescient.

Kylie - I think that is a good explanation of the sentiment. The question for investors is whether this is a true reflection of reality and what needs to happen to sway sentiment. I have been surprised with the persistence of sentiment when the tax issue was resolved and with Ph2/exploration progress. The track record of this persistence may result in many investors to be on standby - committing after good news has not been a good strategy. My personal view is that Sound is now a viable company. Over time I have bought way too much so all I am willing to do now is hold tight.

Is partner finance not part of the deal announced in the RNS on 13 June: “Advancement to Sound Energy of additional Phase 1 and Phase 2 costs, if necessary and at the Company's election, repayable out of future revenue”

What I don’t understand is why Paul Forrest does not appear to seek to sell his shares to an institutional investor in large block transactions

That was my reflection after the fund raise dilution bombshell. I have little confidence in the Angus leadership but find it hard to believe GL would outright lie about an agreement to defer the hedge shortfall across H1 2023. Is it more plausible that Mercuria played him on the schedule of settlement? Jumping this onto Angus at short notice is tough to defend against.

Certainly due one in my view! Phase 1 looks better than it did, it appears there is a term sheet for $260m with multiple option for the remaining funding gap for Phase 2 and presumably exploration partnering options. The tax issue is noise but annoying nevertheless.

Really? A screenshot? Hard to see why - why would they take on the risk of being an onshore target for anyone who is against big oil for something that just does not move the dial? Makes no sense to me

Just bought some more - I think the market has this one wrong.

Things are looking good now. A bit concerned about growing a geothermal leg to the business; capital intensive and not that easy to make commercial. Forget Shell / BP buying Angus - it’s not material and creates huge exposure to their brand

For oil and gas, this is a super simple
Project - however you still need a proper project manager, to manage interfaces and plan proactively. Can’t imagine there will be technical problems after 1st gas.

Good question KTF. This beats me too. Could it be that someone was just waiting for good news to offload 25 million shares without cratering the share price?

There are helpful facts and sad facts. I thought HITS posting was helpful. As to whether he/she has a life, I wonder about that for most posters.

PS - sorry to hear you must have lost a lot of money. Your post is totally reasonable but in my view ‘half empty’. I see things half full. There is indeed a ton of value (potentially billions $) in the licenses and Sound is not the natural player to get there. Someone else will have to pay for exploration but once we have Ph2 approved it makes tie-backs to expanded facilities highly attractive. Without momentum I am afraid that your characterisation seems fair but I feel momentum may be with Sound (high need for gas). That could give sound a bigger slice of the value pie with less dilution

Ericnat - I agree on all counts. SP Angels just looked at immediate liabilities and assets and ignored exploration and expansion value. If instead of making investments, these sort of divis could be paid out. I saw it more as a proxy of upside.