Member Info for Genghis15

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.

"it will push the timings of future developments further away."

By prearing the ground for future appraisal/producers I would see it as advancing the development timescale. By starting the plaqnning process now for future wells they are showing huge confidence in the outcomes of WN A and B, and compressing the timescale to FFD.

"which must have been known earlier in the week " So, are you accusing Edison of deliberate lying? If so, I suggest you email them with your accusation and see what they say. For their reports to be worth anything at all, I do not believe they could have known.
"TRICe criminal marketing" Grow up. Robert Trice is no criminal, the worst he can be accused of is being wrong, and over attached to his own model. And even that is not yet proven.

Like many of us here, you have made a judgement on this company's prospects, and on FB, whach may (i repeat, may) have turned out to wrong. Certainly wells are proving problematic. I have put it down to experience, and will be more cautious in future in how much weight I give to company models, to personalities, and to reutations, no matter how solid they are.

Spitting unjustified accusations at Robert Trice, Edison, et al, is just childish. This is the stock market, get over it.

Tilted OWC theory related to Halifax (or mb Lincoln?) from memory, not Lancaster.

;-)

Cheers, didn't click.....

"RR" ?

oThink they were held back by the Deltic offer, yesterday's rally ac relief that's over. They have a lot more ctaching up to do, imo, given where the 2 cos SP were a year ago compared to now.

MCB
"Both wells are producing from the heel and not from along the full 2km horizontal or the toe."

We don't know that for sure. That was Dr T's interpretation, which must now be considered less than certain.

Those posting of "no brainer" options for cash use ere, please let us know if your qualifications and experience should give any credence cat all to your opinions.

The HUR BoD will undoubtedly be advised by our professionally qualified and suitably experienced FD on the available options. Both he and they will have far more facts at their fingertips than any of us PIs. They will know the likely or contractual obligations to OGs, rig contractors, Bluewater, and CB holders.
They will be better placed than us to assess the risks to future cashflow, and will have better financial modelling teechniques, DCF models, accrued tax losses, etc, etc.

So by all meansm discuss options. But thinking any PI knows better than the Bod what the options are/should be is a delusion, of which there is far too much on this BB from the exclamation mark brigade.

"Beverly Smith and Richard Chaffe, the Executive Board have not bought any in the last five years. "

FYI, neither has been on the BoD for a year yet, and Bev Smith has only had an exec role 4 a few months.

I am no defender of high exec pay but some of the comments on here are uninformed, unwarranted, and in some cases downright dumb.

"Many thanks to Chris Oil "

Oh, dear, that's your rep gone, glad you told us.

malrees
As well as Clare Slightam, there are other geos at HUR still, (afaik) who have cut their teeth on FB under Trice. Daniel Bonter is one who has papers to his name, tho I don't have the links to hand.
On the one hand, they will possibly still think in Trice mode, if you like ; OTOH, they will retian all the knowledge of why the Trice monel was considered robust for so long.

I agree with many on here pointing out that the Trice model is not yet entirely disproved. But the results of WD, WW, and the well behaviours of the last few months, do throw a lot of doubt on it.
I suspect the BoD will go in a cautious direction after September, modelling a higher OWC.

But without more drilling, the jury will remain out ; unless, of course, well performance deteriorates further.

That is the big worry, and is why the SP is where it is.

Given no new equity has been raised specifically for this deal, I'm not sure where your 40% loan to equity comes from?

They are taking on interest rate risk, and inflation risk. 3 month LIBOR can move fast, tho it's currently hard to see rates rising much, if at all.
But the inflation risk matters, imv ; sooner or later all this govt debt will have to be inflated away. wWy have they agreed to a 3% cap? That would be a deal breaker for me, and skews the benefit to Morrisons, who, like all supermarkets, will have no difficulty riding any inflation wave.

Oh, dear, the deranged have returned. I was almost getting used to a welcome outbreak of sanity on the BB.

The problem is the constant chattering of nonsense drives sensible posters away again.

Yes, good news. I dunno what S&S were thinking, or if thety were suckered into this by major Delic hoder(s0, but hope they've learnt to stick to their knitting.

non commercial as standalone, yes. But not as an add on, methinks.

Fwiw it has been my hope, afraid to whisper it , but mb things will not take quite as ong as the "few weeks" stated. But loose lips sink ships, as it were.

As you sat there are variables, but also the CMd feom memory was less than clear on those cpsts that were truly fixed and those which were not.

The main thing to remember, tho, is the calcs ppl are making on this are based on the 18k bpd annualised figure. that is NOT comparable to any quoted current figures, which will need to be reduced for a 10% downtime allowance.

On 8 July the co said ".A planned annual week long maintenance shut down is provisionally scheduled for September 2020."

On 6 Aug it said "On 2 August 2020, the Aoka Mizu FPSO underwent a controlled shutdown to undertake an inspection. The inspection identified necessary repairs which have been ongoing in recent days, with production expected to restart imminently. "

I see no reason to connect the two, and fully expect a fiurther planned shutdown in September. To the extent the two statements allow for misinterpretation, the co should immediately clarify, imho.