Member Info for Genghis15

Yes, come on, bartle, what are you doing posting 3rd party articles on the state of the oil market?

This bb is reserved for the converted, only believers welcome.

"it might be a luxury we cant afford"

A habitable planet just might be a higher priority.

Hmm. I wonder, has Daniel Bonter gone too?

Obvs it increases your holding., which in turn increases your liability for development costs.How does it reduce your cost?

So why buy a bigger stake, if you're then going to dilute it bcos it's too high risk?

What is the sense of buying an increased share in a project - leading to an increased share of costs - if it is then "subject to farm out"?

Well, that's how it is. They have geology consultants, I'm not making it up. if you trawl their site the presntation might even be available, tho it was a couple years ago now, I think.

Quite, I'm sory, meant to clarify...not suggesting theyt have any inside infi, given (as yet) they have no Bod seat.

But they DO have their own geology consultants, and they delivered a presentations in the past at their AGMs, at least one of which was available to all at the time. So they have access to geology expertise not available to us PIs, was my meaning.

booky
i would give up on Halifax, didn't flow at the time and we believed RT's explanation of drilling mud. Doesn;t look like that now, can't see anyone putting $40m ish into drilling any holes on there ; same for Warwick. Lincoln, well....long shot imv, but given the hookup would be relatively cheap it just might fly.
I personally doubt it tho, given low PoO, CC agenda. only half decent resrvoir stats, and negative read acros from EPS - don't forget it's the EPS supposed to be proving up the whole Rona Ridge basement play. And given Spirit's situation, they'll not be throwing any money at it anytime soon, imho.

I struggle too to find positives, and I couldn't care less if that irritates a few here.

The only positives I can see are ;
1. CA think there is more oil there. They have more info than us on the geology, so mbthey know something. but mb not.
2. Bod have kitchen sinked the bad news, so it's possible there's some upside to reservoir performance. Today's offload may support that view.
3. Debt situations like this where the co has substantial tax credits just might have value to a predator (most likely PE, imv) tho anything like that might not see shareholders do well. If debtholders have to take haircut, Sholders could get wiped out. So mb not such a positive after all!

All imho, so dyor and make up your own mind.

Dc
i don't have a strong view on PO atm, there is huge oversupply potentially, along with uncertainty over the recovery from Covid.
But for all the negatives, OPEC+ have shown themselves capable of discipline when backed into a corner ; that corner being the one i banged on about in March/April. If I have a base case view, it is that PoO stays around $40 ish for the next 6 months or so.

s for figures, I thought I explained them at the time, and if I nwas a 4 or two out it's not a big issue.

I don't post here out of "feelings" or suchlike. This is a share, and the co is in the oil business.

The fact is the financials are not good, partly thru PoO, but mostly because the whole project was predicated on Robert Trice's vision, which appears to be invalid.

The crux of the matter is that the resource here is much smaller than thought, and may need much more capex just to get back to 20k bpd.

The last tech update kitchen sinked things, imv, but there is no certainty of upside even so. CA think there is. Mb they are right.

All I'm trying to point out is that nobody knows, and it is impossible to value a co which might be producing 20k bpd, 10k, 5k, or next to nothing.

Bim
that is your perception.

i would point out that posting 3rd party predictions is very different to posting complete nonsense about the intentions of the OGA, or te "certainty" of the SP going forward.

I am usually careful to hedge any forward looking posts I make with caveats, but ones grounded in reality, not wishful thinking. There is far too much of that on here at the moment, and very little reasoned analysis of the geologic and financial facts.

"Well it seems lots of people agree with me "

Yes, it does. But this bb has become a cathedral of the deluded in recent months. If your prophet is PlantedBHa, who called the bottom at 5p and continually posts unsubstantiated nonsense, you may need to reach for the reset button.

Good luck with that pov.
It requires the sp to roughly 15 bag from here.

The price of the CBs is telling a very different story.

"that isn’t an issue until 22"

Nonsense. No one ever expected a 2022 maturity ; the expectation was that it would convert to equity with the SP well N of the strike price.

It's now effectively stright out debt, and weighing heavily. It will need sorting asap, and barring some great upsurge in well productivity and prospects, that can only come at the expense of equity holders, in one way or another.

Well, that's useful to know. HL show my requested allocation in my account and have taken payment, but they are only shown as allocated and not live. And no statement frm SUPR either about it as far as I can see.

I expected a RNS today confirming both the allocations, and admission to trading.

.Your figures appear to relate either to combined WC from both wells, or to 7-z, which is why I said "The relevant comparator is the WC from 6 alone"

Capt
no, I can't be asked to crunch nos again either but let's say $35 at current rates min, it was $28 @ 20k bpd but not all that cost is variable. So mb $5 barrel currently, but likely zero in Q3 given shutdowns etc.
As for not giving cash updates with a production update.....well, I bet the Bod is getting an full end Q3 cash breakdown.

Yes, there is probably some FCf ar current Poo, I'm prolly a bit too pessimistic there, but I don't think it can be much.

Without revisiting all my calcs from months ago I think all in b/e was in the upper $30s, so there should be some FCF but it will be highly sensitive to production rates. And there may well be some lagged cash outflows from previous or committed capex. Note they did not give us an updated figure of cash, which some might see as a worrying omission.

Sorry for "production costs" read "all in sustaining cash costs"

"Water cut has also dropped slightly" says Urraca

Has it? The relevant comparator is the WC from 6 alone. From a quick look at recent RNSs ( most of which don't give separatye figs for the 2 wells) it looks like it has crept up, to "c. 19%."

On 11 Sept RNS said "The 205/21a-6 well began to produce water in October 2019, with a water cut (prior to the recent scheduled FPSO maintenance) of 18%". In April it was 7%.

Bear in mind this is from the 6 well alone, which is supposed to sit above the OWC and is the only well we have atm.

Secondly, cash. Net free cash at 30 June was $106.2m, from which we can now deduct $21.7m, leaving $84.5m.

Given what we know about all in cash costs, production rates, and Poo since then I doubt if that has changed much ; current production costs cannot be much below current Poo.

So, $84.5m in the bank, possible need for a new well ($50m + incl hookup? not my forte, please correct if it's yours) $220m bonds due in 20 months time, and little or no FCF at current Poo.