Member Info for in4cedros

rxdav - thanks for your post - it seems to me you have considered the risk/reward situation here and purchased with that knowledge - good luck with it whatever your time scale.

Dross - perhaps LK has already ' come clean ' about his development plans for SWP . I might have believed you wanted to make a genuine contribution to this debate had you not cried wolf so many times before - everybody remembers your little tricks - schoolboyerrorgate ( projecting profitability on a 327 bopd scenario) - CO2gate ( was that Ross quoting or LK - why ?) - TropicalFloodgate ( even LayLadyLay warned about effect of flooding !) - Placinggate ( always round the corner when you've only got $2.6 million cash and growing revenue !) - Lindgate ( did the world really end when that option expired or did LK take offered Placing from supporters to obviate need for borrowing?) - Leo'sCVgate ( why try to undermine LK just to get a lower SP?) - Outliergate ( LK has brought on over 300 bopd from new production and is confident enough to predict ALL GROUP COSTS COVERED IN Q1 - where is the evidence for the flash in the pan - who has most reputational risk LK or rossannan ? - wow that's a really difficult one !) .

rxdav - thanks for your replies - as you are going to give the matter full consideration you may also be interested in my response to your post of 08:08 today.

You suggest that LK could say this or that to address specific concerns but LK has already outlined the plan and nothing has happened to suggest that it won’t happen the way he says it will - if anyone needs greater assurances than have been provided they are free to ask the team a question at CERP but the team are not obliged to reply.

People buy/ sell/ hold all the time without having full information - If you are not comfortable to invest without additional clarification that’s your prerogative - it’s not LK’s fault - he’s made his statements. He is more concerned with the success of CERP than whether you personally make the optimum trade - you’d probably get a good laugh at the AGM if you attended and said ‘ brilliant performance LK for hitting the jackpot on SWP but you were lousy on your communications because I preferred to believe rossannan on the lse board and I missed the opportunity to get in at the 2p level ! ‘

Tony - good typo spot - my apologies - good job the market was closed at time of posting - of course it should be 2019!

Irene - please be aware LLL is very touchy about people quoting Saudi Arabia in the context of onshore oil production!

rxdav - there are many here that trade CERP but few who feel the need to create alternative scenarios for CERP attempting to assist their agenda - rossannan has form for it and ‘ punishmentgate ‘ is oneof the more recent which has interested you.

The evidence so far from the company is 29/08/2018 - reply to a Question To The Team :-

‘The Company’s strategy for over a year has been to fund our initial exploration activities in the SWP from cash flow generated from our operations. At the end of 2017 CERP became cash flow positive from operations and is currently following an active campaign to grow PRODUCTION and CASHFLOWS, including the addition of the SD assets which the company believes will provide MANY NEW AREAS for PRODUCTION GROWTH.

It is intended that future exploration activities WOULD BE FUNDED BY THIS CASHFLOW and from EXISTING RESOURCES,with the initial drilling campaign STILL being planned for mid 2029.’

‘ On EXPLORATION SUCCESS the company would seek to progress innovative additional funding arrangements in an accretive manner to appraise and then develop the SWP and HAS HAD DISCUSSIONS with numerous parties interested in assisting the company unlock the huge potential of the SWP.

There are plenty of financing options available to the company that would not result in significant dilution should the company see success in its exploration activities.’

The rns dated 09/01/2019 stated - ‘Drilling is to be funded from existing cash resources or through partnering with appropriate third parties.Exploration success in the SWP could be transformational for the company given the known prospectivity which exists in the SWP and the commercial terms associated with any discovery.’

The same rns advised cash at 31/12/2018 was $2.6 million - an increase from the date of the 29/08/2018 original answer from CERP. The rns also went further and claimed CERP would COVER ALL GROUP COSTS in Q1 - a step up from cash flow positive - the previous stance.

rossannan has been banging on for a long time about cash burn but seemingly LK takes a different view - I see no evidence why LK will change his established stance on the financing of SWP - what information does rossannan have that convinced him that LK can’t afford the first drill without getting a partner on ‘ punishing ‘ terms - I say absolutely none and this speculation is just one more of his ridiculous scenarios to influence the less knowledgable on here!

I noticed there has been grudging acceptance from detractors of the first drill being afforded without assistance but that this is thought to be unlikely because it would exhaust much of the cash pile! I say that would be a problem if they didn’t have a sustainable business running alongside which will probably be even more cash flow positive then than it is now - even if the drill was unsuccessful the business would continue and CERP would almost certainly try again - production and revenue are growing from the 6 fields!

Dross - there you go again confusing your theory with evidence!

You claim any future partnering will be on punishing terms but there is no evidence for that as no one knows exactly what LK has in mind - there weren't too many complaints when Schroders introduced a wad of capital to the business at 5p! You are thinking about the business in a blinkered NR type way where options were limited!

You have been wrong so often people weary of your tosh - Schoolboyerrorgate, CO2gate, TropicalFloodgate,Placinggate, Lindgate,Leo'sCVgate and Outliergate just to name recent examples!

CERP have cash in the bank to finance the first drill and the last rns indicates LK is very confident about financials even in Q1 - I know you want a cheaper entry price, so do many others, but they don't post this trademark saturation tosh to try and achieve it! You even concede that LK is likely to achieve better partnering terms if he drills the first one on CERP money but for you the options are only a Placing or a punishing partnering - other permutations are available!

LayLadyLay - most people have you on filter and I'm prepared to forego the gratification I get from dealing with a projectile vomitting misleading troll so feel free to take an extended holiday from posting here - something like 10 years would probably be met with greater celebration than a mutually agreed backstop elimination.

LayLadyLay - deluding yourself as to who is squirming could also be usefully included in your next session- still not answering the question regarding why you Troll this board!

LayLadyLay - didn't realise I'd touched a nerve when developing your psychology theme but probably worth pursuing the cathartic element at your next meeting - there is probably a professionally named syndrome which covers a person's need to projectile vomit misleadingly over others wealth for no apparent reason - as I said before Trolls Ross and Irene have their objective to buy lower - what's yours?- just imagine you are in the chair - let it flow - you know you want to!

Garnhiem - excellent detail in that link - news expected soon regarding the drilling of the Fully Loaded Compartment at South Erin according to last rns.

Irene - thanks for your response - the naivety confirms my previous suggestions!

I believe it's worthwhile to clarify that it's not me making the claim it's Leo Koot - he has the detailed management information that you and I don't have - although we are both ignorant in that respect you are both ignorant and clueless. We'll see at the end of Q1.

I never used the term ' a technical profit ' I merely explained that a company in CERP's position needs to invest heavily to bring on production at the many new fields they now own so this will be reflected in the accounts. I don't think you'll find many shareholders urging Leo not to spend generated revenue on the new fields just so that the accounts can show a profit for tax purposes.

In historical accounts the company have generated revenue but G&A costs have been very high in relation to revenue but from LK's comments I'm expecting to see that ALL GROUP COSTS ARE COVERED !

It's a shame that Troll Irene has to misquote me to make a point but understandable when desperation takes over - a more intelligent Troll would just have said - I'll believe LK when I see it bla bla bla, LayLadyLay spotted the trap and was much more measured in his comments on that subject as he did, at least give the financials some consideration recently - his well selection for SWP was indefensible though!

Sagacious stuff Ray - always enjoy your posts - you score highly on my trusted poster index - good luck with your investment.

LayLadyLay- re your post of 19:13 - I don’t filter anyone - if people choose to filter you that’s their prerogative - perhaps they have already made arrangements to monitor WTI themselves and they don’t care if Leo now lives in Portugal ( which is a Countyi also like !)

CERP have already consulted professionals on selection of drill targets - from what I’ve seen of your presentations I doubt you’d get past the front door but why not go along to the AGM or one of the Investor Days and tell Leo where he’s going wrong !

Irene - Leo didn’t say he would make a profit for technical reasons that most people understand and that I’ve explained to you before.

CERP is an expanding business with lots of CapEx that will be included in accounts so showing actual profit in the near term is most unlikely but that isn’t of concern to most shareholders here who invested in a high growth share - they want to see costs being covered by an increasing margin as revenue from oil sales increases. If you expect a profit it shows how naive you are and adds weight to the argument I have suggested that it does not seem this share suits your risk profile - perhaps a simple deposit account should be your main focus but as I’ve said before check the FCA sponsored website for free investment advice!

LayLadyLay - firstly I must disabuse you of your notion ‘ You seem to think that anything Leo says is a stone cold certainty ‘ - that’s by no means the case but in most cases I weigh up the probability he’s right bearing in mind that he has access to a comprehensive library of information from the company files and he has reputational risk if the information turns out not to be correct.

Let’s contrast that with the Trolls on here - they demonstrate a poor grasp of the technicalities- like you selecting an unsuccessful drill from a different area as the basis of your argument and Trolls Ross and Irene making schoolboy errors regarding the financials! Reputational risk for you Trolls is nil as you are just keyboard warriors who are non shareholders and in your case you haven’t said why you post on here despite being regularly asked ( Trolls Irene and Ross do, at least, claim they might buy at their selected SP!) .

LayLadyLay - Why should Irene comment on Leo's claim ?

Good question - firstly I don't know why she is sniffing around this share at all as it doesn't appear that her personal risk attitude suits a high risk potential high reward share like this - surely you'd agree with that LayLadyLay?

Secondly Irene has, historically, had a lot to say negatively about CERP financials so now would be a good opportunity for her to challenge Leo's bold claim and we would see at the end of Q1 who has the most credibility.

You trolls are keen to fill this board with negativity - I'm merely encouraging you to justify yourselves - so far you're pretty woeful on that front as this thread has demonstrated!

BTW LayLadyLay, Irene said, 14/12/2018, -' Even though 1000 bbl-d will be an achievement, just by simple maths of the historic accounts, you can see that this production level is still MILES AWAY from generating free cash flow.'

If you crave attention desperately you can give us your own analysis now that you've ventured beyond commentary on negative WTI movement and Leo's change of residence - hope you can improve on your desperate effort to discourage drilling in SWP though and you still haven't explained your motivation for posting here!

Garnhiem - yet another excellent contribution - most will learn something from the Prime Minister’s address - some will learn a great deal - mentioning no names!

I thought the following quote was also topical - ‘ The creation of computerized drilling databases also allowed operators to use historical experience to improve their operations in similar geographic areas and geological formations.’

Dear Readers,
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the contributors to this Maidens Prayer mega thread - it all started with an invitation for Irene to applaud Leo’s rns statement -

‘ Group is forecast to remain operationally cash flow positive despite the recent international oil price reductions, with OPERATIONAL PROFITS FORECAST TO COVER ALL GROUP COSTS IN Q1 2019’

To date Irene doesn’t seem keen to comment on Leo’s claim despite being so sceptical of Leo’s previous position about merely being cash flow positive - I would have thought his claim was the sort of prayer answer she was looking for but alas sometimes there is no pleasing a troll - wouldn’t you agree LayLadyLay!

LayLadyLay - The ArKeX ariel survey looked quite impressive as when overlayed on known deposition it clearly identified those areas as well as other areas of interest. I don't work for either company so I haven't seen the magnified detail but the slide that was published appeared encouraging - you can poo hoo all you like but your evidence for it NOT being there is ludicrously flimsy as the speculaterblogspot research highlighted actual finds of oil - high API - which is suggestive of migration from a lower level - as you seem to acknowledge - deposits at the lower levels are capable of sustaining higher bopd for longer periods - perhaps similar to Soldado North 15,000 bopd average over 50 years - of course I'm not greedy so a more modest result would please me!

LayLadyLay you are the troll it's down to you to prove the info in speculaterblogspot is not true and so far you have not proved they are lying - it's no good citing drilling that has been unsuccessful you have to prove the drills Persad referenced did not encounter the hydrocarbons he claims they did - I look forward to your detailed research!

I see you are already preparing your next trolling move to talk about funding - LK's has cash in the bank and is talking about partnering- troll rossannan was always banging on about funding cos he didn't read the official info from CERP which referred to partnering - if you have no financial interest here why are you bothered how the funding is created - detail is a matter of speculation at the moment!

LayLadyLay I'm quite happy for you not to invest here - you aren't obliged to comment - I have a financial interest that's why I contribute here what's your motivation?