Member Info for IAmNotAnAnalyst

Soberman (sorry, autocorrect)

Doberman, are you talking to yourself?
Or are you just trying to wind up holders of the shares here?

Saxmaster, there's no price to leak as it is not known...it won't be known until the book closes, presumably tomorrow morning.

Is the confusion due to the partial completion of the EWT. Want it kind of done on the gas and now it's paused to be redone as an oil EWT. I'm presuming there's some decent new floors data at least on the gas part of the field the revised CPR can take account of.

OAW, does that mean you're pointing to the long list of times this circumstance has been repeated?
Even a single example would be useful to try to understand what to expect.

I certainly hope not, but a few offloads does not a long term trend make!
We've seen the conceptual model and graphs HUR have shown with bottom hole pressure scenarios. This trend showing where 9-12 months of consistent data sits on that graph will show, for the most part, if we are nearer best case of worst case in terms of expected future production.

The similarity is not geological or born of confusion about types of fractures. It is an unconventional oil source meaning the commercial longevity is based on uncertain assumptions and at risk of being shorter than expected (as well as potentially being longer).

If that's true then the 'market message' is basically that the investment will decrease the value of the company. That doesn't make sense for RBD nor those who subscribe to the new shares (or however this funding is driven).

Therefore I can't see any logic of it being less than 1.1p.
The whole pitch is going to be that any investment of £20m or thereabouts will add significantly more than £20m to the value of the company. So I forsee, assuming the raise is successful, a decent increase in share price once it's all agreed.

I've heard back from Serica now and I have to say I was impressed with the speed of the response and care shown. A complete opposite experience to my recent car insurance renewal (but that's another story)!

I received an explanation which convinced me that there is no conflict with the Bruce 'Access to infrastructure' page and the decision to defer was taken for economic reasons as mentioned in the interims. The intervention is now planned for a more optimal time and I'm happy about that.

Is the actual reason for the nomination known?

I think you've inspired me to write my first email to any IR! There's clearly a conflict in what they're communicating so it's worthy of a question and an answer. Will keep you posted...

Hmm, maybe it's the Rhum separator and/or the H2S scrubber. It seems as all the other bits of equipment have plenty of capacity as you said. Maybe they're waiting to replace those Rhum specific assets and update them then.

No worries - I was just putting the quotethere for completeness.

Also, I haven't checked back about what they've said historically. I'd be interested to know more. I was just taking them at face value (which isn't always a great idea)!

This is what the interims stated:
"... the R3 well requires intervention work before it can be brought on production...Meanwhile, production from the R1 and R2 wells has continued at higher than anticipated levels meaning that the processing capacity currently available for additional production volumes from R3 is lower than expected. Economic analysis indicates that a deferral of R3 capital expenditures is beneficial and consequently execution of the R3 well work is now expected in late 2020 or early 2021."

They said a little more about R3 and the delay in the interims. It was that the other wells were flowing so well that they were almost at capacity. Therefore it wouldn't be financially prudent to spend the money on R3 just yet.

Thanks to both sasa and 1759 for the explanation.
In my head those two dates were the other way around, hence there was a gap. Clearly your explanations are accurate and make more logical sense that nobody could fall through the gap!

Maybe I'm wrong, I was just thinking there was a day where the SP was reduced by the divi (i.e. new buyers don't get the dividend as the stock hasn't cleared in time for the register) yet sellers lose their chance of getting the divi.
Maybe I misunderstood and those things happen at the same moment.

Surely if you sell after the register day ends but before the ex-div time (end of business the day after) you miss out on the divi and the value of the divi has been removed from the share price? If that was true it'd be stupid to sell that day.

To go back to the share price malaise/selling pressure: surely we'll find out on the 4th Oct as the ex-div date nobody would be selling on that day would they?!

They said the following in the interims about the Foinaven area:
"An extended maintenance shutdown from July to September is expected to improve operating efficiency."
In addition in the summary they said 3kbpd production in 2019 rising to 5kbpd in 2020, partnership reviewing options for production post-2025.
So maybe we should expect an RNS tomorrow talking about increased efficiency, production, like and therefore recoverable reserves also. Let's hope so...

Also it's an article from 4th September...so I'd say that's a pretty strong hint.