Would it make a difference ?
Hence the reason analysts refer to ‘risked NAV’, rather saying ‘the price should be xxxp’
‘Evidently, the traders don't; the analysts already have!‘ Analyst projections are based on projections, including revenue creation, not current state, otherwise the actual price would reflect. Just trying to inject some realism Alternatively I know nothing about what I am talking about and should probably quit my job.
Thankfully 😅
Because I am invested here, but surely everyone sees my point that the share price is going to stay low until revenue starts coming in? No trader or analyst is going to value this at 1 billion plus without a means of delivering that revenue.
Big boab fae Banchory
No way Mike, is that really you!!!!
Echo chamber Echo Echo Echo Echo
Anyone think there is a moratorium on ministers signing anything given the proximity to elections?
But we are worth a billion pounds. I don’t understand
Why is everyone so offended, it’s just a bit of banter. I don’t have any right to tell someone what to expect. Was just pointing out the obvious drag on the price. We are closer than we have ever been but the price isn’t even at the highest it has been at. Can’t believe you mentioned the lucky octopus. His genius led to his downfall and eventual death. RIP Paul
Hey, no really, I think everyone missed the point before this threat went awol. The current value is obviously based on oil in the groond. My point was that the rise price will be held down as there is no revenue stream. There is a lot of money being spent to get oil but until that oil comes, there is a liability. The liability being that you are spending lots of money with no return. If you don’t agree that’s fine, just don’t expect a massive rise without any revenue stream coming into the business
I won that argument
I can’t help but reply
Anyway, I’m regretting all this now. My point was, until hur monetises the business, the share price will stay low. Not sure how that was so hard to understand.
Ye but your looking at it wrong, aren’t you. If you had a company with a trillion shares at 10p, but no revenue or assets you turn into value, your argument is that that company is worth more than PMO???? Madness
Having a giraffe, right? Pmo has fewer shares and each is worth more, it has a greater EV than HUR...
If you have revenue, debt can be reduced, so it still has value. Worst case scenario is a business that has debt and no revenue.... can we at least agree to that????
And it’s still worth more... therefore, it stands to reason that the ability to make revenue makes a business more valuable than one that doesn’t
The ‘oil money is a bonus’ was a debunked argument from 2014...