Member Info for highlandmatt

https://twitter.com/lonny1971?t=PG9QHguBl4rnU1TRUIRZOQ&s=09

Porters - you do remember PRD is 2 chaps running ops on 3 continents?

MEM - a scenario worth evaluating. Given the mcap is well below the CPR and Novum note NPV, the discount is down to doubts about delivery / timescales / potential to lose % of the assets to JV. If those risks are mitigated, then even if there is 25-33% dilution, if the mcap trends closer to NPV, then SP might not drop at all. Also cash on the balance sheet increases the mcap in the short term and if drilling proves up resources, then value increases. Thoughts?

Keith - I've heard the same in the Western Isles / Outer Hebrides.

SHS - the stated plan was for Greenan profits to be held in EAG, to be invested in the next AD asset purchase. That might change, but I would have thought a couple of hundred thousand would show more progress being leveraged to purchase a profitable asset (doubling AD assets and income), than reducing the funding required for Ruvuma by a fraction (5%?). Unless of course that 5% (deposit or fee) makes a material difference to securing finance or not.

https://twitter.com/lonny1971/status/1516877068063186944?s=20&t=TRmwYdcaSi0G1qx269HHqQ

Lonny Baumgardner
@lonny1971
·
1h
Replying to
@__The_Cube__
and
@PredatorOilGas
I love cooking with oil and gas ?????

Yes, held through success of Coho and Casca (3 drills) disappointment of Chinook drill, and success of Royston. From mcap of £15m to £300m and now £180m. Still happily buying as I know there is good news and growth to come. I have other holdings, but am more of a 'buy and hold, studier of Buffett' type, of companies I know lots about. I work full-time and spend my weekends in the outdoors, so limited time to research, and not happy to risk large (for me) sums on companies I've not researched (been burnt before). TXP NPV is 50% up from here, more with Royston development. Why go elsewhere? However, each to their own strategy and I wish everyone well with their choices.

I've been buying fairly regularly at everything from 11p up to 150p, which is what I calculate as fair price. Anything sub 100 I've been selling other stocks that have less than 50% upside potential to buy TXP. I'll start unwinding a bit once Casca and Royston are online, possibly in 9-12months, hopefully at least 200p. I plan to retain a significant holding for the dividends and 10year drilling program. Don't forget Casca pipeline sized for 200mmcfd.

Think the market had high hopes for Royston and at the moment the numbers disappoint. Mcap currently high Vs production, so a lazy look doesn't get where this is going.

Can't see any more wells being drilled until there is infrastructure in place and a sales agreement. Otherwise a risk of stranded asset.

$5m would be better than relinquishing. A bigger sale price, or a deal that retains some interest would be better. If not, pay for the seismic. Hope for a resource increase. Hope that triggers an increased SP or renewed sale bids. If no sale, raise for the drill. Repeat. The business case is 'spend $35m, get that back per year'. Getting there is the difficulty.

Scott - I use iweb-sharedealing.co.uk. If this site blocks the url, google search 'iwebsharedealing'. It is UK based.

I don't know whether being 'across the pond' will cause difficulties in account set up or tax? It allows me to buy US stocks on an execution basis (quotes take a little longer to come through). Maybe there is an equivalent over your way?

Hi Sturm. I assume there is, but I don't use them. I use direct execution through an online platform. I request a price for buy or sell, am given a quote, and I decide whether to accept that or not. I assume you can use various tools / methods on AIM, just as any other market (although I might be wrong), as they are just instructions / parameters for your broker.

I was attempting to answer the question of how the price is fundamentally determined, as opposed to how one might choose to interact with the market to obtain transaction prices that are acceptable to you.

Hope that makes sense? It was quite an open question from Tinmandolin.

And mine. Thanks Dartron, Scott.

I suspect PAET are, in very simple terms, running a ship up and down lines. That ship chucks out a beam in all directions to look at their licence area. To get an accurate picture you combine the picture from two adjacent lines to show you what is in the middle. To look at the extremity of their licence, they need to run the ship down a 'line' that is in our licence area. So they are not mapping our area for free, it's just we will get some data (i.e. half an image) from allowing them to sail in our licence area. Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?

The price is a factor of the supply and demand for shares. More buy requests, price goes up. More people wanting to sell, price goes down. The Bid and Ask are the market makers' stated prices for selling and buying. Usually transaction prices are within this range, unless there is a request to shift or obtain lots of shares in a hurry.

MRC - I suspect that is correct. Placing and open offer has to be preferable to Prolific, although I suspect the BOD are content that relationship gets us through the seismic. Hopefully the results give a resource upgrade, and either concrete bids or a higher SP for raising funds.

Here's a thought. Rather than a massively diluting placing, would shareholders support an offer (open or otherwise) to shareholders to invest in the drill? Obviously we'd need to see a business case, but surely it's an option? Probably have enough time to get it done? We'd potentially have to go again for the development costs, but if we can't find a buyer, it's got to be better than relinquishing. Presumably the BOD are confident of a sale...

I think as I am multiplying up 'within oil' (i.e. not transposing gas to oil or vice versa), I'm safe. That also means that as Finncap have already worked out the value of 4m barrels, multiplying by 30 to get 120m barrels is also safe. Therefore Royston should be worth £2 a share.

Looked at another way, given it has been declared commercial, and 6 wells are planned ($30m?), it has to be worth a chunk of cash to be worth the capex of 6 drills.

Or am I making the mistake of boe being energy equivalent, not value equivalent?