Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
GG - as for strategy of taking the additional license it’s certainly a bold move which could be a master stroke if Uruguay becomes a proven oil hot spot but it may well take more time than is being talked about so that shareholders may have to dip again if they can’t sell other assets but the current shareholder base seems willing to back board even though the ‘ disgruntled ’ cohort seem to hold sway here!
GG - thanks for attempting to generate a reasonable discussion on here! Although you haven’t said it I’ve seen the usual suspect trolls posting up the line if BP rejected it it must be carp!
This is not unexpected and is an easy knee jerk reaction but it should be considered with facts!
When BP withdrew the Conjugate Orange Basin link had not been made with such strong evidence- hence current clamour for licences. Secondly if you Google BP and CEO Looney you’ll understand that with new very tight criteria it’s unlikely they’d consider even the sexy new Uruguay variant!
Gazza - glad you’re keeping up with developments - I agree Shell are unlikely to partner us at the moment as they will probably want to check out their own allotted area first. However it’s easy to verify the topical interest in offshore Uruguay and the CEG licence appears attractive because the work commitments are modest and they have already identified 3 sites of particular interest so it’s potentially an enticing prospect.
I don’t expect the disgruntled cohort to agree neither am I guaranteeing they’ll get a suitor but the disgruntled cohort aren’t guaranteeing they won’t - it’s a speculation - don’t speculate and then become a Moaning Minnie if you’re unsuccessful!
GG - thinking about your shareholding in the context of a carrot is clearly your prerogative but what about when spud season approaches - allotment holders may well be very pleased !
Cheer up Gazza try and see the positives - but if being disgruntled and disillusioned makes you happy carry on - difficult for me to discriminate between genuine hardship cases and blatant trolling so no change likely from me!
Have you thought about taking legal action against the party that recommended you invest in a high risk oil exploration and production company?
GG - this is an oil exploration and production company - no surprises the MO is similar to last time - the desperate disillusioned cohort don’t want to talk about the FACT a major oiler paid them $750,000 for exclusive data room access over 3 months - it was a shame for shareholders they didn’t find a partner and decided to go it alone but it could have been worse if haircuts approaching $20 million were not agreed!
Will it be any different this time - YES - they don’t have ability to go it alone and Uruguay Government has advised they want a deep pocketed major to drill in case someone goes wrong so it’s down to the farm out. No guarantees they’ll get it GG but surely you’re not surprised they are trying and CEO is commendably enthusiastic, with apparent justification!
If you don’t like the risks don’t invest - no one having arms twisted Gazza!
Odd amounts to sell - no significant price reduction - suggests MMs are confident they’ll find willing buyers fit their turn.
It could be argued the > 362 million buy weeks ago might be more significant if you believe people trade on solid information!
Briggsy - most people are aware that the Bahamas drill did proceed!
I haven’t seen any indication that Uruguay want drills to go ahead so they can stop production and claim carbon credits but if you have please share your information.
Briggsy - I think you are getting a bit ahead of the facts - let’s see the results of the survey before concerning ourselves with restrictions - looks like there’s plenty of areas on that map for a potential drill - but I can understand why the disgruntled don’t see it that way !
Uruguay aren’t going to make significant funds from licences unless they permit drilling so reasonable proposals that respect the protected sites are likely to get the green light imo !
Druid - never say never to a fund raise but instead of your usual disgruntled whinging why not share with us why you believe a fund raiser or consolidation is on the cards given the current cash position - historically such moves have been fairly predictable from the published fundamentals!
Briggsy - nah - but RNS make good reading - how about the BOD turning a >$100 million legal claim into an aggregate value benefit of $9 million, including $2 million near term cash from sale of Cory Moruga ( a non producing asset! ) then there’s the $1.1million from the other asset, 35 bopd lost production.
What about the saving in expenses - over $1 million PER ANNUM ?
Max - hear what you say but imo PRD are very keen to run a project in Trinidad using their new tech where they can operate on their own and potential is very good for that site for a quick win if all goes well. They know exactly what problems are there from due diligence.
PRD knew the financial position before they concluded the deal. Note directors of PRD have large holdings, Paul had more than 50% not long ago so it’s a hobby as well as a job.
Druid - calm yourself!
Don’t know for sure - Bonasse produced 7 bopd in November , bulk of balance very likely from Goudron and TI as these 2 are the new focus of attention from strategic review. TI could be one to watch with good infrastructure and work over potential plus EOR collaboration from our new BFF PRD!
Recent RNS re asset sale suggests CEG will be losing 35 bopd production for 2023 onwards but as mentioned previously this is trade off to save over $1 million pa expenses and trousering > $3 million near term cash.
Briggsy - tut tut - ‘ barely producing/selling any oil ’ - have you not seen quarterly updates, not to mention February RNS from which production could be deduced at 350 bopd .
Plenty of areas for haters to hate without minimising production - 350 bopd might not seem much to a mogul like yourself but its significant for CEG!
Gibbo - great PMA - hope it works out for you - at least your eyes are wide open about the risks here !
I always try to look at it from POV what would I have done differently - I certainly believe their should be more payment by results for BOD but that will be forgiven by many if they pull off Uruguay.
Max - it was NIL.
Potentially it’s way over 100 bopd but there were technical problems, particularly water cut, that made development problematic. PRD are paying a good price for it so they clear believe they can deploy their technology/ cash to achieve an effective result.
I’m assuming they’ll need some large tanks to deal with water cut on site.
Re 100 bopd trigger yes I’m sure they’ll be wary for the $1 million but if they can get significantly more it’ll be worth paying the price at current WTI.