Member Info for HandspringGuy

1) 88E has had 2 successful drills and we are still waiting on results.

2) Texas is ticking along nicely

3) Exciting new prospects in Namibia

4) Fully-funded for at least a year

…everything else is just speculation

…in your opinion

For the record, I think both 88E and PANR are both undervalued

Why are you obsessed with comparing PANR with 88e?

They are different companies with different strategies and different investors.

If someone wants to invest in Pantheon, they will. If someone wants to invest in 88 Energy, they will. Some might choose to invest in both.

It’s not a competition.

By the way, you are the only person I hear (constantly) referring to downdip, lower classification. The classification is determined by the oil that comes out of the ground…which in this case is very light crude, not “lower classification”.

Bennster

Don’t get me wrong, I’m less than happy with the way this company is being run at the moment. I just mean, don’t put any value at the moment in Google trading charts for this stock because there are only 1 or 2 trades to benchmark.

You could buy $10 worth of shares today at 0.8 and suddenly the Google SP would be 0.8 and probably stay like that for a week.

Spinefx

Interesting analogy. So I have a couple of relative questions on this experiment:

Let’s say I leave my water tap on for 24 hours and do in fact get 7000 litres of water; firstly, where do I put those 7000 litres of water? 🤔

Secondly, how do I know that on hour 25 I won’t get air for the next 24 hours? Should I keep the tap running for 2 days just to be sure? Or 3 days? Maybe a week? Now I have about 48 tons of water to store. Should I continue because that tap could run dry for the next 24 hours, right?

…or do I use an educated assumption that the flow rate will continue as fairly constant after those initial 4 hours using industry knowledge and advice from the water company (and my helpful neighbor who checked his tap last week)…

Olderwiser,

My point is that anything you or I, or anyone else, writes in this forum is just opinion (and should be considered so).

However, anything published in an RNS has to be factual.

Yes, you were correct about the cash raise (didn’t need a crystal ball for that one). But you were also wrong about the flare…and the oil/gas ratio.

When 88e published that they were fully funded, they were fully funded. I have $100 currently in my pocket. It probably won’t be there 6 months from now. You can’t call me a liar in October when my pockets contain a different amount because things change over time.

Also, you can’t have an opinion and state it as fact, especially when your opinion differs from the information published in a legal document.

In answer to your question, I will gladly listen to your opinion (at least a few times) but I will base my opinion on published evidence and facts, not on opinions in a chatroom.

0050

Yes Scot. That guy…because how he decides to spend his own money is frankly entirely up to him but the rules of ASX dictate that all developments have to be accounted for and fairly reported. So he can’t say things like “very good results “ when results are poor…despite what you and your buddies would love people to believe.

And forgive me for calling 88e a mining company but they do mine the Permian basin I believe. Arguing semantics to try and sound cleverer than you are highlights just how petty you are.

The trade was worth $55

7% down, all based off 1 tiny trade.

I don’t think we should get too excited by that

OW, you keep talking about the poor results…but the company says the results were very positive.

Now, who should I believe: the CEO of an international mining company, mandated by law to be upfront and honest? …or a keyboard warrior with an axe to grind?

I think I’ll go with option number 1, thanks

16.5

16.9

17.0

…I’d say they were probably large buys

Well…that didn’t take long 😎

I just bought another 2M

Olderwiser,

I’m gobsmacked you are still bleating about 4 barrels.

“…Proving just one reservoir viable would have been an outstanding success…”

I agree. And they just proved 2 of them

SSSCCCSSSS,

I think your record might have a little scratch

Another excellent report.

All positive news. I’m very excited about the future!

The objective was not to collect oil (as you well know), the objective was to assess the rate of flow.

So it really doesn’t matter how many barrels were collected…because no barrels were required to be collected.

You seem a little obsessed with this point.

Today I wondered how heavily it was raining.

So I went outside and saw it was raining heavily.

I didn’t need to stand outside filling buckets for the duration of the storm to assess it was raining.

Https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02796243.pdf