Member Info for Genghis15

He has deliberately given the impression that UJo would not need funds this side of Wressle cashflow, then leaked a placing (not deliberately, but so what?) and sabotaged his own fundraise.

In other areas of endeavour heads have rolled for much less.

Perhaps the DB fan club will pipe down for a while. After all the noises he's made in the last few months aout being "fully funded" he not only springs a placing but sees it leaked as well, so it will be sub 18p rather than mb 25p.

Great stuff, David.

Did he?

Hmm. Thnks for link. just listened carefully to AS' words, which are as you quoted. I'm sure this is a departure from previous cooms, but you are right,and I am in error, tho by how much is hard to judge. But thanks for correcting me, anyway,

More than a PP slide, but less than an actua; so;ution, Very gnomic.

The only issue around gas flaring is OGA permission. Stobie made clear revenues would be de minimis, the gas solution is a "black oil enabler" in his words.

Jadam
I have seen all the presentations over the years, and the plan for the EPS was a gas solution by end y3, as required by OGA. The strategy has been in olace for 3 years, and that plan (50: HUR; Spirit, Lincoln hookup) is in tatters.

None of us can know what OGA attitude will be to an extension, but i would expect 2 tactprs to be considered, first, HUr's position wrt PoO downturn and well problems, JV issues, etc. The second is the growing pressure to reduce flaring from CC lobby.
Hopefully Friday will throw at least some light on it.
Jadam, can you quote an exact form of words from presentation which you think makes clear only a strategy need be in place? It seems to me that would be far too woolly a commitment, easy for any co to wriggle out of on commercial grounds. And it would be a considerable change, imo, to previous OGA intent as communicated by HUR.

The plan was to have the gas solution in place so as to increase production from Lancaster, and incorporate Lincoln.

The gas flaring permit was limited to Lancaster, and I thought was limited to 30k bpd, tho I have seen reference somewhere to it being 20k. Sometime ago I emailed the co for clarification but received no reply.

My interpretation is that the solution needs to be in place, tho it is possible for the OGA to be flexible.

Whilst the most important points we neec to hear about Friday are well performance and reservoir modelling, the gas solution question comes in close behind.

"Genghis15 where did your costs amount to +$100m? Flaring commonplace in north sea from my own reading"

As my post said, I don't have the costs to hand and and it would take some time to glean it from past presentations, so $100m was a guess, tho not, I think, an unreasonable one.
Of course flaring is common but new permits are not granted easily, and in HUR's case there are plenty of references in co presentations to the need to address the gas solution. Our permit was granted as a temporary measure to enable the revenue to prove up the FB concept.
Whether the OGA would permit an extension, if that concept was looking problematic, is uncertain. If granted, I suspect it would be onmly for a limited period.

Anyway, I would expect our update on Friday to cover the issue.

NSn
Your "facts and fundamentals" must assume the pointsi mentioned.

It is equally possible to make a case based on equally likely "facts and fundamentals" that values the co at £0.

We will know (or at least, know a lot more) on 11 Sept.

Perhaps you could share , clearly you know that the wells are behaving, the water cut reducing, and the new modelling will maintain a lower OWC?

Because that's what we need to gert back to high teens.

"It will all be obvious on the day as they will present to analysts and investors at 9:00am BST on 11 September. Probably all you will need to know will be in the share price movement way before us mushrooms are told anything in the afternoon, good or bad."

What nonsense. There will be a RNS at 7am. The co will be careful in both presentations to say nothing of significance not in the RNS.

SOP

We know nothinmg new wrt the value of the co.

Just tells us what we already knew.

No new info, yet sp up 7%.

Which tells you that SP is purely speculation driven.

All the unceretainties remain, we are no wiser as to whether this share is worth 0p or 30p+.

Thanks to all for some very informative replies.

Quite a contrast to some BBs which seem infested with the angry, the combative, and the completely unhinged.

doomsday is one possible scenario. There are others. it is not a case of "doomsday posters".

It is a case of pointing out the possibilities, the likelihood of each, and the consequences. I find myself pointing out the doomsday scenario only bcos there are so many here posting as if it doesn't exist. If the reverse were true, it is the positive that would need pointing out.

But ignore posters, just look at company RNSs. They are clearly warning of downside scenarios. they mb over cautious. Mb. DYOR, is all I say.

I have just looked at the AR and it covers the various pharma programmes very well, but is vewry light i on financial info that as a s/h I would like to see. No b/down of programme costs, for instance.

But the most important omission, in common wth all ARs, is the lack of forward looking projections ( oh for a Companies Act mandating such!).

But my read of the cash in hand at 31 March, and the cash burn in year to that date, leaves me thinking RENE will need to think about raising by end 2020.
Thoughts, anyone?

olda
"so long as we are still profitable, it should be on significantly better terms" Really?

So HUR go to providers, say, " we have this great reservoir that's playing up a bit, but it might come good, please lend us some money cheaper than 7.5%" ?

I will be surprised if refinancing happens this year ; more info on th reservoir needed first, imho.

And if ( a big if, of course) the wells clear up, refinancing will not be needed. ; if they don't, it might not be available.

JADAM "the whole post is OBVIOUSLY biased and wrong."
My post sas that HUR may have a great resource, may have almost none, or may have something in between. we don't know which.

I'm not sure what you find "obviously wrong2 in that. If you can provide more certainty, I'm sure we would all like to hear it.

Finally, Planted asks an intelligent question, tho it is framed, and followed up, as a matter of fact, evenbwhen slift et al point out alternative scenarios.

The point is, we don't know. A year ago, a little prched water wouldn't trouble us. but now, after dubious drilling results on Warwick, less than ideal on Lincoln, and increasing water cut from the EPS, the jury is out on the reservoir model.

There is still a possibility, imv, that Trice was right, and we have a world class reservoir.

But there is a much higher like;ihood that the reservoir is both smaller and more complex than envisaged, that current wells will need intervention/redrilling, that new wells will be needed. In other words, that the concept is uneconomic. The EPS might struggle on for a few years throwing off cash, or it might water out..

We don't know. I'll say that again, in capitals, for the hard of hearing. WE DON'T KNOW.

That's why w are slipping down thru the 5p mark. Uncertainty, over whether we have a stonking resource, none at all., or something in between.

Not sure about sub 4p but agree the CEO appt is not big news.
It is positive, however, imv, as it removes leadership uncertainty, and puts someone at the top with significant experience of fractured (tho not basement, afaik) reservoirs. I have no doubt he and Trice will be acquainted, with expertse in closely relate field I'd imagine they must be known to each other.

The real news, as you say, will come next month.

It's no good applying 2 different metrics to a valuation and then comparing them, meaningless.

By your logic if yesterday 16.35 pence X 129 million shares = £21.09 million, then as at 10.30 13p X 139,416,000 shares = £22.795M.