Member Info for HopefulDave

I seem to utilize to suit my views? Wow coming from you that’s priceless.

I’m merely pointing out (again) figures you seem to pride yourself on being so absolutely spot on with are incorrect, I dare say very much alongside your calculations of what’s in our bank account.

You always under calculate revenue and overestimate costs, you often forget to add other items (such as the warrants (ironically)) previously into money in the bank calculations, and constantly mocked my views on other ways of capital being made available to us.

All to suit your agenda of stating we need a placing at <insert weak price here>

No need to get so defensive and deflective, you got it wrong. Again. But thank you for admiting it.

Ignoring and deflecting the entire point of the post which was you have not (once again) calculated revenue correctly.

Are we not going to get more money from gas than previously estimated? Yes it looks like it.

Does the gas increase from IP - Looks like it.

Do you calculate that. No you don’t.

Do you state everything is down 30 % instead of oil is down 30% and gas is up 40%. - Yes you do.

I’m not denying WTI dropping is potential reducing revenue if it doesn’t go back up by the time we are online, just stating (as a fact) the entire revenue is not dropping 30%, nor declining 15%.

Abacus or not. Those are FACTS you are ignoring and have twisted.

Oil is down. Yes. Gas is up, that’s not waffle, that’s a fact and yet you chose to reduce all the numbers as you always have.

The other figures and costs you are also plucking out of the air and you are deciding what is and isn’t costed as per the CEO’s comments with zero evidence as to what is or isn’t included. You have decided what is or isn’t included and that is not fact, it is pure guesswork.

If you are going to chuck numbers about, don’t guess them and state them as if they are facts as you do not know that is the case.

Indeed Substp.

I see as usual, the flawed abacus possessed one is back and continues to calculate the entire revenue stream in terms of dropping by 30% and therefore calculates all the revenue as being down 30%, and then continues to decline those figures by 15% a month.

Gas prices have risen to well over $4, a good 30-40% + and may well go back towards $5 again

The gas produced if it actually bothered to look at the production figures increased as opposed to dropped from the initial IP figures.

So rather than calculating those revenues collectivley as BOEPD and as 30% down and then also declining those figures by 15% a month, perhaps it should try to break out the figures, calculating the revenue correctly, and then not declining that % and basing it on what we actualy got, and more importantly what we will continue to get from the 2 wells that will go back into production alongside these 6 news ones.

Gas was originally indicated as likely to be spot - $1.1 in the prospectus, however since then we have had the NLG’s produced and the high BTU rating of our gas confirmed accordingly. Not sure if we wil therefore get Henry Hub - $1.1 or potentially a premium on that in itself, however the pipeline will take all the gas away from the site.

Either way. Gas prices have increased significantly and predicted to be way above $4 all winter, and the gas produced doesn’t seem to have declined but increased from IP.

Of course it won’t completly offset oil price drops, but that’s probably going to bounce again once OPEC (in their own interests) meet on Dec 6th and ensure that production is slowed and the price can increase again.

That or POTUS gets a bit of a nudge from those that put so much into the Republican campaign funds to remind him to stop being such a plonker!

But back to the point in hand. The revenue forecast was a forecast (as far as we know) based on the same production being received from the wells and therefore would include oil and one also assumes the gas. The gas portion, in month one, would already now be 30-40% + higher in terms of revenue from the original projection, and also that gas produced will also increase in line with the original wells production over the following months, as opposed to decline.

So yes the decline in overall revenue will be there with the oil producing reduced as it follows its decline curve, but hopefully the gas follows the same pattern as Wildhorse and Powell. It will be nice to see the “sold” figures for gas mostly matching that produced on the first two wells.

Reduced oil (if based on current pricing) Increaed gas revenue (based on current pricing)

Prices pretty much irrelevant until WH and Powel are online, and the new wells start producing anyway!

The company has stated its on a sound financial footing, and expects revenues from Kansas in 2019 also...

Actually think you should seek medical help Diane. You are showing signs of obsessive behavior that is bordering on insanity.

What happens when there is no public placing, how will you cope?

You are clutching at more straws than Worzel Gummidge.

Run along now, go pollute another board (again) with your insane ramblings.

A lot less than was wiped off the companies MCAP today that’s for sure!

Why not take what Diane thought we had in the bank, take off his monthly running costs up until now, then divide what’s left by the money we had left for projects then divide by 2 or 3 projects, and leave plenty in the tank to continue with the other projects and also continue WD, which is now off the table...

And remember that we wouldn’t have got revenue from it until late next year...

I get the feeling the most we have spent of this is time and effort of our own resources. Eric, and no doubt some of Roberts time also.

And yet we drop ~£4m today, alone..

If this is not attributed to real asset value, but instead confidence in the BOD, or perceived time value of our own resources, then delivery of anything, should therefore instantly start to restore the faith and the SP accordingly, should it not?

JJAL - considering everyone here seems to be obsessed by simply revenue, and not potential or assets, WD would not have produced any revenue until more than likely at least Q3 next year, wasn’t funded yet, and still had to be permitted, the asset as it was of course had huge potential.

If that asset had been funded, permitted and carried interest, similar to that of ED was there, the valuation it alone would have added to the company would have been huge. It wasn’t valued that highly recently or currently or our SP would have been way higher to start with.

That many wells fully permitted, funded and with a free carried interest generating tens of millions of dollars would have been big.

I don’t underestimate its a blow to our long term goals, but (like nearly all our assets) with our previous and now even lower MCAP none of our current projects are valued any where near their actual potential, with that in mind, I would say the fall is excessive.

Something like £4m wiped off the companies valuation for WD as it was? Not yet financed, not yet permitted and +£4m reduction in MCAP in one day, and considering this was in the public domain on Friday already...

I have nothing to wash my hands off, stated it would be huge if it came off, and also stated we were massively undervalued as it was. I stand by both comments, and still stand by them. WD was never priced in as a project moving forwards imho, and our other assets are worth way more than our current MCAP would place us.

So yes it’s a blow, but it’s a blow to something that was never ultimately priced in the first place imho. Considering whilst increasing acreage and the number of wells we could drill, we continued to fall in price not rise, and now off the table, we fall even more.

Despite the progress in Kansas and ED...

“why's it oversold ? what have we really got to justify the share price being higher ? "water treatment units " Great bought these prior tot he winter coming.”

This statement sums you up completely JJAL. You fail to see, or deliberately put down perfectly valid solutions / systems.

The water treatment is not there to facilitate the provision of frak water due to a shortage. If you look at the Project details it is a 9 month project to prove up the solution in general, the number of units (2) could “only” process 500bbls a day, a lot of water, but not a lot when considering fraking 6 wells.

So it makes no difference what time of year it is, and in fact running through the winter period will no doubt also prove their worth as they are there to treat flowback AND production water.

As such running them during our flowback and subsequent months of production, throughout winter, will prove they can deliver a solution to clean water up throughout the year. A bit pointless having technology that cleans your water but then fails during winter months?

Oil wells stay in production over winter. Oil wells produce water over winter as much as they do in summer.

So instead of having a pop at absolutely everything. Try and actually understand the company you have supposedly invested in.

A toilet day as far as the SP is concerned, but seeing as you love to pull apart anything potentially positive, just posting this to bring some balance to the board and police your negativity....

Haha Fadec Indeed.

Yes I can use google. It is where you can get links to actual facts, actual industry recommendations, practices, what is used, how it’s used.

So when you go on a public board and state something, you are doing it having read articles and discussed said content with others etc.

As opposed to simply trolling and dismissing something out of hand as you haven’t seen it yourself before.

You may as well start arguing the earth is flat, we never went to the moon etc... or maybe do some actual research and post something useful, wouldn’t that be nice!

Just some bedtime reading for you JJAL. Chapter 6 just the 110
Pages.

https://plasticpipe.org/pdf/chapter06.pdf

Maybe cause it’s under the ground JJAL :)

JJAL - what else do you propose is used to transport a completely inert gas stream from the well heads to a processing facility?

In what I can decipher so far, in my current state. I ditto fadec’s points.

The company applied for everything it could due to 112. It had to. Irresponsible of it not to. The company had to file for what it could to protect what rights it had.

Some of the wells in WD are on existing pads and go away from the flats so should expect them to be fine.

Expect (potentially with the other continued additional accerage) maybe pads further away will be utilised with longer drills, let’s face it some of these were 5 miles long with 2.5 miles in the productive zones originally, and again not looked in detail at what’s left drill wise.

Not panicking myself, but whatever I post I feel will get shot down, by some. My Honest opion. Until hear further from the company as to the development strategy and if seek to re-apply from different locations etc, just have to take it as it is.

Not read single post properly.. I meant (my point about not posting)... Will try and catch up on train home

Out all day at vendor offsite. Aware loads of stuff said. Had a considerable amount to drink so may or may not post again depending what I can interpret and disgest and actually make any sense off..

Cranleigh, I agree that has to be beneficial to the overall delivery of the tunnel and I dare say the consortium of banks will also view it that way.

Noodle, the other aspect was with respect to 112 looming and the other amendments also on the agenda, pehaps that application in itself was “neither niave or disrespectful“ but instead just an application to protect our mineral interests at that time.

I’ll also return to my earlier house building analogy for another example:

When you wish to extend your house but aware the neighbors may disapprove, do you:

A) apply for more than what you want, then get knocked back a bit, then come back with what you originally wanted and everyone concedes it’s a much better solution and are then pleased you have entertained there wishes and an all round “comprimise” was reached.

B) apply for what you want, then get knocked back a bit, and end up with less than what you wanted in the first place?

Noodle. As the saying goes. When you want a dog or a cat, maybe you ask for a horse? Perhaps if apply later on with the wells further away will be a nice compromise?

Splendid and tremendous. That will go nicely with the $4+ gas predictions (not mine or some magic charts btw) You never know what might happen to spike the price or drop it or when. Who would have thought there could be price movements based on actual supply and demand eh? Is the cost of gas going up because the squiggly line says it will? Or is it based on the fact reserves are a little on the low side, the price is this high in Autumn already, and we are coming into winter..? I see Diane Scuttlebutt is still trying to gossip it’s way into more talk of impending doom and gloom. With the amount of uncontrollable and repetitive verbal diarrhea it spouts I wouldn’t trust it to be able to predict its next bowel movement any more accurately than our bank balance, future revenue predictions, the price of oil (or gas) or pretty much anything.

Gallini, indeed and since all of those permits we applied for we have increased the overall acreage by a further 400 acres, and we have the SLB land auction closing in a few days.... I think the future oil plays look busy. Roll on the Kansas updates.