Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Sloppyjoe
Rather odd idea that you keep the price low to attract sellers don't you think?
Obmuj, this seems to come from Andrew Bailey, Bank of England, who makes the point that switching out of coal will boost oil and gas prices. Indeed, we are already seeing this in terms of increased gas prices. How long this transition and inflated prices will last is anyone's guess. I suppose the lesson for Zephyr is get it out if the ground as quickly as you can!
Yes, Bluerover, hopefully the news will be good from Zephyr in terms of confirming exploitable resources, in which case the SP will hopefully go up. But how much it goes up by will depend on the market view of the length of time for which the oil and gas can be profitably produced and sold. Oil price may be increasing in the short term, but that price can only be realized on oil sold in the short term, which will presumably be a small fraction of Zephyr's hoped for eventual output.
Bluerover
I am obviously not making myself very clear. Do you not think that, in the event of your suggested sale or partnership, the prospective buyer or partner will be considering the value in terms of whether oil/gas can be profitably produced and sold for the next five years or the next 25 years? The issue is NOT what happens in 15 years, but what the market expects to happen.
Hoarder and Seven24
It's a great pity that people do not study and try to understand an issue before posting on it. First, as I have said in a previous post, this is not about newspapers expressing an opinion, but reporting an academic study. Second, the study was globally orientated, not confined to the UK, so the fact that it appeared in a UK newspaper and we are focussed on a US based company is totally irrelevant.
I will say it again. The issue I am concerned with is not what happens in 15 years or whatever time, but what the market in the immediate future THINKS might happen. Do you not think there would be a price difference in the share now dependant on whether Zephyr can profitably produce and sell over the next five or next 25 years?
If you think reduced demand for gas and oil is for the distant future, just look around at the huge advances being made now across the world in renewable energy.
Evan
Instead of making snide comments (typical guardian reader) it would be much more helpful to all concerned if you tried to understand the points I am making and engage in the debate. Perhaps give yourself longer than two minutes between my post and yours to read, understand and respond. I thought I made it quite clear that I understand that investors are not here for the long term, but that in my view the short term price is dependent on the long term future of Zephyr, Disagree with that if you want, that would help the constructive debate I was hoping for.
L Hopkins
The issue for Zephyr is not the short term oil price, but the price over its production period. There may be short term oil price rises, but in the longer term price is likely to fall as peak oil/gas materialises and OPEC countries and others with fixed investments try to sell as much as they can whilst they can.
It seems there are quite a few on this board who would rather not think about the implications of peak oil/gas. Perhaps we should call them peak oil/gas deniers!
Mr B
You may well be right that most will be gone on this board from Zephyr over the next ten to twenty months, but surely the price in the short term is going to be dependant upon how much oil and gas can ultimately be extracted, and what price it can be sold at.
Seven24
First, it is not a question of "what newspapers have to say". It is a newspaper reporting on a recently released professional research report. Second, it is not a question of what happens over the next five years, but rather the next ten to twenty years. Yes, there will be considerable demand for oil and gas for some years to come, but I see little doubt that it will fall away substantially, very much within the timescale predicted.
The result will be a fall off of demand, which will have different effects on different producers. What I was hoping for was an insight from contributors to this board, on what the impact of such a scenario would be on Zephyr. I suspect this would depend on how far into the future the exploitable resources might be planned to last, and on the comparative cost of such exploitation Vis a Vis other providers.
Evan, I am not sure what that is meant to mean. The Guardian, and its sister Sunday paper, the Observer, are the only UK independent national newspapers, owned by an independent Trust. It has probably won more awards for its reporting than any other. It keeps very clear separation between its factual reporting and it's opinions. You may not like it's opinions, but if you are trying to fault their reporting, you are barking up the wrong tree.
ยท
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/nov/04/fossil-fuel-assets-worthless-2036-net-zero-transition
Any thoughts on how this might affect Zephyr?
Papaduke, the buy/sell designation works by whether the trade price is above or below the average of buy and sell prices. This can obviously go wrong, but does it matter?
The only way that I can see the price can be managed downwards is by MMs refusing to take buy orders. Are you suggesting that is what is happening?
Sentanta, this is all getting rather boring. You have still not explained how you think the share price is being managed. Apart from that, the proportion of total shares being traded has nothing to do with the share price. The price is determined by achieving a balance between those who wish to buy and sell.
Sentanta, congratulations, not sure what you mean by housekeeping, but at least you have at last acknowledged that it is the trades that are determining the share price.
Sentanta, you STILL continue with the rubbish about price management. The only thing holding the price back is holders selling their shares!
Setana, why do you persist with this rubbish? If the trades are so piddling that MMs would not cross the floor, why would they need to increase the price? I will say it again, the price will increase if the purchase demand exceeds the sales at the current price.
So you keep saying Setana, but you still have not explained how MMs can deal without increasing the price if everyone wants to buy and no one wants to sell.
Sorry, Setana, could you please explain how market makers hold down the price if everyone wants to buy and no one wants to sell at the current price?
Just to add, yes there were opportunities to make serious cash, for instance July 13 to July 14 would have been a 10 bagger. But most would have made a loss, look at the maximum period chart for Zephyr on the London Stock Exchange site, which makes that abundantly clear.
I see little point in anyone being dishonest about losses incurred from the days of Rose. Obviously any loss or gain will depend on when one bought into Rose. More than a decade ago, the shares hit 550, but they were down to about 1.2 when CH took over as Executive Chair.
On a technical point it would seem to be that Zephyr is the same company, given that the transition was billed as a name change