We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Cedros peninsula is SW Trinidad where some areas ouse oil naturally at surface. At Galpha point oil bearing rock is visible at the beach. At that beach it’s possible to see Offshore oil platforms in the Venezuelan basin where oil has been successfully extracted for many years.
Many have suggested that a deep drill onshore at Cedros may yield similar bounty but depth is required, ideally 15,000 feet and that costs a huge amount. CERP under Koot managed to finance two drills, at shallower levels, but was commercially unsuccessful.
CEG still have license and it wouldn’t surprise me if it was sold for many millions as part of the stated strategic plan.
GarryGraham - how is the Charlestown deal a first step to dilution bearing in mind the conversion of the loan and Warrants are both at a premium to SP?
A share consolidation, per se, is not dilutive.
This is just more Timid Trolling trotting out the historical information and suggesting history will repeat itself. Yes it can - I expect the SP to advance in the build up period and it will almost certainly fall if there’s a duster- who would disagree with that.
If, however, the drill is ultimately successful, history of scenarios involving other companies, not CEG, suggests the SP will boom spectacularly!
The above 2 scenarios are the crux of buying shares in an Exploration Model - your dilution suggestion is pure tosh !
Arrynillson19 Apr '24 - 08:18 - 21153 of 21154 Edit
0 0 0
Disgraced Compulsive Liar 12bn - there you go again with your lying - why make up this shyte !
The Chevron deal is subject to approval from Uruguay Government, that much is true but why make up that it’s also dependent on seismic ?
Always the same 12bn - when you’re on the ropes you become more and more desperate - people on here know that - it’s why you’ve got a FILTER LIST LONGER THAN SCHINDLER!
I’m posting up below relevant paragraphs from the RNS dealing with the Chevron deal. The cost of 3D seismic is clearly not cheap, up to $15 million mentioned in the RNS.
Try and follow the logic here 12bn, before yesterday’s financing announcement you were telling us daily, sometimes multiple times daily, that CEG were rapidly running out of money. How did you think that CEG would complete 3D seismic, before completion of the Chevron deal LOL!!!!!!
· Chevron will pay to CEG US$12.5 million cash on completion of the Transaction, these funds will be used to support the further development of the Company's business.
· Chevron will carry 100% of CEG Uruguay's share of the costs associated with a 3D seismic campaign on AREA OFF-1, up to a maximum of US$15 million net to CEG Uruguay.
· Following the 3D seismic campaign, should Chevron decide to drill an initial exploration well on the AREA-OFF 1 block, Chevron will carry 50% of CEG Uruguay's share of costs associated with that well, up to a maximum of US$20 million net to CEG Uruguay.
Point here is that there is no dilution element associated with the consolidation, unlike previous versions in this company’s history that Trolls will no doubt mention.
Many institutions are not allowed to invest in very low price shares so the move is likely to be positive by widening the net of potential investors.
Druid - there were disappointed bidders for some licences.
Eytan acknowledges he was fortunate there was no competition for the first licence but if you listen to the story of how it came about in the recent video you’ll understand that CEG worked hard for their luck.
Has it occurred to you that Uruguay Government like the cut of CEG’s jib in that CEG forged ahead with the seismic development at a good pace and ultimately landed a well heeled suitor in Super Major Chevron!
Time to get behind your shareholding Druid they’ll be plenty of real trolls for me to banter with once this starts to heat up!
BTW what on earth possessed you to post at this hour - you are lucky I’m still up!
ATB!
GarryGraham- rereading my post about Timid Trolls and your speculation about Chevron pulling out last minute what about speculating that Chevron didn’t know about the duster and that could be their get out - of course that would be to your detriment in respect of the claimed recent investment- intriguing eh!
In4cedros
Posted in: CEG
Posts: 5,829
Price: 0.145
No Opinion
Timid Trolling!25 Mar 2024 16:45
Willec - GarryGraham is an interesting case study on the Trolling spectrum - as the heading suggests he is a Timid Troll - instead of slating the company he pops up from time to time, makes some neutral/ positive comments, whinges a bit then slips in the negative comment.
I remember the pattern from the lead up to the Bahamas drill - found it difficult to believe he’d actually invested having regard to his state of anguish he’d been in then, when it failed, the buyers remorse kicked in big time!
If his posts are genuine it’s difficult to understand why someone with that attitude is prepared to go another 10 rounds with the company on a new drill venture whilst pooping their pants at each stage.
Furthermore in such a scenario why highlight negatives if you are genuinely invested - by way of example I give you fairly recent post where instead of just saying the Chevron deal is not complete until everything is agreed, including Government approval he decided to speculate that Chevron had included last minute caveats in the deal. He may be correct but why introduce that little bit of extra speculation based on zero knowledge - I could easily speculate that Chevron have done so many deals historically they have a rigorous tick box list to complete and want to see all the evidence before they even release the news they’ve done a deal because pulling out at the last moment suggests they didn’t do proper due diligence in the first place which is not great for a Super Major!
I wish all shareholders success in this venture - there’s plenty of proper trolls about - they don’t need your help!
GarryGraham- in the light of the historical information about the Total drill it’s intriguing that there was such a scramble for the Uruguay licences, not to mention the Chevron $12.5 million deal for a part share.
Even more intriguing is why you’ve bought more in this very recently!
SadKen - this board has, historically, been overwhelmed with negative comment, largely from disgruntled shareholders or former shareholders. These are generally people who seemed intelligent enough to read the ' shares can go down as well as up ’ warning but for some reason ( never disclosed ) didn’t think it would apply to them buying shares in a high risk Oil Exploration and Production Company !
As the SP tanked for so long the disgruntled formed a bubble of Moaning Minnies who just trolled the board wanting to cast doubt on the actions of the CEO - recently this has been to cast serious doubt the CEO would get a farm in. Willec to his credit has argued that the CEO should be given time and was clearly right so to do.
I see no problem with posters positively supporting their investment - surely it’s what’s expected by anyone venturing on to these boards - that doesn’t mean they have licence to lie but positive spin is acceptable-he doesn’t need to list all the negatives- he’s not claiming to be an independent advisor.
I often highlight negative comment on here as I do question the motivation of such posters - if they’re trolling to get the SP down I understand it but trolling just because they’ve been jilted seems rather a waste of time!
OhnBriggs
Posted in: CEG
Posts: 1,094
Price: 0.1075
No Opinion
RE: Deadlines23 Feb 2024 10:37
Hahahaha, ah Luthee you really are the ultimate apologist. You fail to recognise that if a CEO comes out with a deadline such as fam out by Christmas and then that changes to oh now another 12 weeks, by end of Q1 2024 it makes them look naive and incompetent when these deadlines aren't met. All the while tie company is running on fumes.
Why on earth would anyone want to give their money to a company with no credibility and run by amateurs and most importantly who on earth would want to partner with them. The industry and market never forgets those who mislead and default.
12bn - 09 Apr 2024 - 14:25:54 - 21018 of 21037 challenger energy group - CEG
Imo CEG will need cash soon,well before the Uruguayan govt gives it its go-ahead and it will have to do a discounted placing,imo. We shall see but do not trust folks with a vested interest here.
Why would anyone want to place any credence on your opinion when they can access the video of CEO post Chevron RNS pretty much saying company had funds for around 3 months before they needed to access capital and he very resistant to any dilution.
Therefore your trolling is premature - rather like your conclusion CEO wouldn’t get a farm in deal cos it was taking too long!
Good try 12bn but no cigar! BTW I also love your filter system as it allows me to debunk your tosh without triggering moronic replies from you!
Another BTW is if they need cash to tide them over option of a loan shouldn’t be overlooked ( like they did recently regarding sale of Cory Moruga ). I’m sure CEO would consider that as he advised recently he reads my posts!
By NEIL HARTNELL
#Tribune Business Editor
#nhartnell@tribunemedia.net
#A BAHAMAS-based oil explorer has received "a great endorsement" from independent experts who confirmed its chances of success are at least four times' higher than the industry average.
#Simon Potter, Bahamas Petroleum Company's (BPC) chief executive, told Tribune Business that confirmation of the validity of its underwater seismic data "can only be positive" for its joint venture partner search.
#The exploration outfit, whose licence gives it until April 2018 to spud its first exploratory well in waters south-west of Andros, hired Moyes & Co, a petroleum industry consultancy, in August 2017 to assess its prospects of striking 'black gold' in Bahamian waters.The independent analysis, just unveiled by BPC, calculated the company's "probability of success" for each of the seabed oil sources it is targeting as between 25 per cent to 35 per cent.
#Mr Potter said this far exceeded the oil industry's typical 5-10 per cent average, with Moyes & Co verifying that the amount of oil economically recoverable from BPC's southern Bahamian licence fields ranges from a mean of 8.3 billion barrels to "an upside" of 28 billion barrels.
#The consultants' technical audit of BPC's seismic data, and the company's interpretations of such, also confirmed the oil explorer's belief that the project can be economically viable with a field of just 200 million barrels.
#"Moyes independently calculated the probability of success (PoS) factors for each of the major reservoirs assessed, the majority of which were calculated in the 25 to 35 per cent range," BPC said of the consultants' findings. "Though a few are risked at 12-15 per cent.
#"Applying a recovery factor in the range of 20 per cent to 40 per cent to the Moyes [economically recoverable] volumes would result in an unrisked Estimated Ultimate Recoverable (EUR) in the range of 1.6 billion to 3.3 billion barrels (mean), and up to 11 billion barrels (upside)."
#Mr Potter told Tribune Business: "We've always been very excited by the project, and it's very large and of a global scale, but to have independent and technical experts endorse our own numbers is great.
#"It's very reassuring for us, and a great endorsement of the technical work we've done and the work we've asked them to do on our behalf. The economic threshold for a commercial development is somewhere below 200 million barrels, when the oil industry is average is 500 million to one billion barrels.
#"The audit confirms we can be commercial and viable below 200 million barrels, and the technical experts have endorsed multiple thousands of millions of barrels, not just 200 million."
#Mr Potter acknowledged that "the numbers can be eye-watering at times", but also pointed to Moyes & Co's assessment of BPC's drilling success prospects as far higher than the global oil industry's average.
#"They also said the probability of success is between 25 per cent a
garrygraham - before i respond to your post in detail i’m interested to learn why you decided to continue holding shares in bpc during the drill stage bearing in mind the cos had been published by bpc and they clearly indicated there was a much greater chance of failure than success. ( i can probably dig out the detailed information if you can’t remember).
you must remember the drill being characterised pretty much as ' **** or bust ’ and that’s how it turned out, except that the company managed to cling on by the skin of its teeth!
GarryGraham - another example of Timid Trolling - I’m sure we would have heard from Chevron by now if the recent RNS was a pack of lies but sagacious advice not to bank on it until all i’s are dotted and t’s crossed!
I’m still amazed someone like you is purportedly interested in this type of high risk O&G Exploration Company when a Post Office account sounds rather better suited to your apparent risk appetite! ( no jokes about Post Office please - I’m seemingly talking to an old fossil here! ) .
Jilted - if you bothered to watch the Crux video, which states it’s a paid for product, by CEG, you’d note CEO emphasises the high risk involved in investing in O&G Exploration shares.
I’m genuinely ignorant about why you decided to buy shares in CEG in the first place having regard to the risks involved, which were mentioned by many on these boards, including me, at many stages of the company’s development.
You may find whinging on here cathartic and I do note you seem to have less of an appetite for it post the transformational Chevron announcement - let’s hope that, perversely, the good news continues it’s healing for you!
MadMax - heartless you say, about yourself - yes I agree and probably I could add cold, calculating and ruthless in your trading something like Goldfinger in the Bond movie - a formidable opponent for any trader of shares to lock horns with!
I am, however, a bit confused as to why you are spending time commenting on this particular share if you’re not attempting to influence whether readers buy or sell - after all you’ve told us you ' don’t pretend to care about other people who I don’t even know ’ !
Why elapse your time on here giving us your valuable opinion if there’s no benefit in it for you - at least Goldfinger was doing it for money power and influence!
I’m a very simple soul I just see CEG as a plc, owned by shareholders who pay BOD to run it. Shareholders have bought their shares of their own volition, presumably because they want the company to prosper so that their shares might rise in value - I can’t readily see anything wrong with that and I wish them good luck - why would anyone want them to fail unless that person had a financial interest in shares losing value!
There are people who do take these negative financial positions and then seek to infiltrate shareholders to sell out to being about a weaker SP - I call such people Trolls ( they can be lovable but most are inclined to be nasty! ).
I do make a distinction between Trolls and disgruntled current/ former shareholders- the latter are inclined to blame the company for their losses and find it cathartic to whinge and whine on here, Jilted being a prime example but I sense even he is getting close to the end of his mourning period for his losses and is losing some enthusiasm lately in the wake of the stellar Chevron deal!
As for yourself, to your credit, I accept you are careful not to tell people to buy or sell and I find that refreshing as I spend lots of time responding to 12bn on the other channel!