Member Info for in4cedros

MrMagoo - good posting there of the scenario most shareholders believe to be sufficiently plausible to justify THEM RISKING THEIR OWN MONEY!

Troll LayLadyLay doesn't seem to think investors risking money is acceptable - the FCA take a different, more logical view, that investors who take advice should be asked about their attitude to risk in advance and have investments selected for them to meet that criteria. CERP would be high risk as an Oil EXPLORER and producer! Troll Irene asks questions suggesting her attitude to risk is virtually nil so why is she sniffing around here? Troll Ross just wants to get a better price and thinks he can ' play ' investors to achieve it by amateurish spin and misinformation!

LayLadyLay as a non investor has clearly spent a lot of time recently attempting to undermine the idea of drilling on SWP - he's selected an unsuccessful drill in a different area as the basis for his argument hat SWP will fail - when challenged on it he has attempted to suggest his drill is the same as the Cedros drill in ' speculaterblogspot ' - it's not and Government records prove it.

Having been destroyed on that argument LayLadyLay then makes the argument that lots of drilling has been unsuccessful and history teaches some of us to be rational in our expectations of success! Presumably this is some sort of desperate plea for all shareholders to rise up and save themselves before it's too late - it's certainly sounding very very desperate now ( for trolls !) .

LayLadyLay asks what is the plan if the drilling on SWP is unsuccessful - I'm surprised at this question because it shows amazing ignorance for someone clearly obsessed with this share ( I'm happy to admit I'm obsessed with it but at least I read the rns and watch the videos!)?

LayLadyLay LK has developed the company already into a diversified field producer that he claims will cover ALL GROUP COSTS in Q1 2019 - I don't believe he is stopping there - he will continue to develop the existing assets and shortly, despite troll rossannan's newly found worries about WTI and SPT I believe he will generate profits, irrespective of SWP development. So if SWP fails life will go on elsewhere within CERP - we've also got M&A to look forward to but don't press me on that as I don't know what LK has planned for all his coloured projects!

As you know it's shallow drill first on SWP and then on with the deep - as MrMagoo has pointed out to you tech has moved on a bit since the 1950's so I believe COS are a lot better now than in your era!

Hope that allays your concerns as out longest standing troll - I'm going to keep asking this question - why are you here?

Irene - this thread was started a few days ago by me and it was addressed to you about the likelihood LK thrilled you by claiming CERP will cover ALL GROUP COSTS in Q1 2019 in his latest rns - you seemed very concerned about that subject in October and LK's comment seemed to answer the hypothetical question you posed at that time - so surely you are pleased with that ( well as pleased as a non shareholder can be !)

Irene - presumably LLL ticked up your post - anyone knowledgeable would have realised that deep drill of SWP was an aspiration under the Ritson regime for many years but he couldn't find the money for it because he spent borrowed money on unproductive drilling at Goudron almost bankrupting the company in the process!

LK and the new team took over with the BOLT deal in a legally unsatisfactory condition - anyone knowledgeable would have read the rns regarding the restructuring of the SWP licence deal which is very attractive for CERP and now makes the development of SWP viable - but a word of caution this share is still not for you as no one is guaranteeing the drilling will be successful - shareholders are wanting to take the risk in return for potential rewards which I'm happy for you to applaud from the sidelines - you can even pretend to have invested if you want - no one really cares what you think but if you're going to continue talking tosh be prepared to be put straight!

LayLadyLay- petropedia.com defines a dry hole as ‘a term used to refer to any well that does not contain oil or natural gas in quantities sufficient enough to pay for the cost of drilling the well in the first place, or justify any further investment in developing the well. What is the difference between a dry hole and a duster?- There really is no difference- a duster is another way of referring to a dry hole. Just like having to choose between using the words ‘happy’ or ‘joyful ‘ it’s really up to you ‘( I bet you agonise over that choice many times a day LayLadyLay!).

Apex 560 doesn’t sound very successful - which is why, presumably, you chose it when you could have selected the more recent well FRM on CERP licensed land. The speculatorblogspot site makes a case for the potential of deep drilling and most shareholders are excited by that prospect.

Presumably if you’d have been around in 1954 to advise you’d have probably have cited the Apex 560 result as a warning against the drilling of Soldado field 1 year later which I’m happy to cite as a success story!

Shareholders here know the SWP is a risk but the potential rewards are likely to be transformational from the deep drilling - if revenue can be generated along the way to reduce the risk by shallower drilling and then deepening subsequently that sounds good to me and is the LK plan.

Shareholders here are entitled to invest in a venture that is speculative - that you don’t approve is irrelevant and I along with many others still don’t understand why you have selected this board to troll ?

Dross - usual tosh from you:-

Production Setbacks - 1000 bopd target achieved !

Cash burn - read latest rns and weep - projected to cover ALL GROUP COSTS Q1-2019

Upcoming CapEx - cash in bank - partnering option being discussed!

Depressed WTI - significantly higher than when LK took over and you ramped the Shyte out of this!

Unfriendly Fiscal Regime - as per previous answer - nothing new but I'm happy for you to saturate Trinidad Government with your campaign - just don't say you're doing it on our behalf!

Dross - another ' mixed bag ' like the last rns would suit me - he achieved the 1000 bopd target, put on over 300 bopd ' new ' production largely from Steeldrum Assets with higher net backs and his confidence from his knowledge of the assets is such that he's made the prediction that ALL GROUP COSTS should be covered in Q1!

For trolls like you saturating the board with cash burn this and cash burn that it's quite a blow and I can see why you're upset about it especially as LK seems able to meet commitments as evidenced by the 1000 bopd target!

LayLadyLay - ACD4 was deepest on the SWP - it wasn't claimed as deepest on the Island.

This isn't some willly waving competition it's more about relevance - if you wanted to give readers here insightful information why pick a duster in a different area? Is it any wonder why I refer to ' troll LayLadyLay '!

LayLadyLay - your selection of Apex 560 Fyzabad was so ridiculous it’s stimulated me to provide more detail on FRM-1 which was actually drilled on land CERP have mineral rights over!

FRM -1 was drilled in 2008 but only reached 12,300 ( 10,000 TVD) before mechanical failure and cost overrun. A 50’ section of oil pay was found at 11,750’ drill depth but the lower Hererra sandstone reservoir rocks were not reached.

Well SWP1 was drilled by Trintoc in 1984 in a spot to the east of Coromandel Settlement. Way back in 1954 saw the drilling of the deepest land well on the peninsula, Apex Cedros4 ( ACD4) to 16,155’and found 30’ of Lengua light oil/ condensate at 13,000’ . This well is JUST ONSHORE Esperanza Bay.

K Persad ( BOLT) said in November 2011 - these SWP wells showed oils which were fractionated and later mixed with migrating condensate. In both areas we therefore expect to find deeper residual oil.

The discovery of light oil/ condensate in ACD4 and FRM1 in the shallower Lengua/Lower cruse Sands. Therefore residual oils are expected to be in the lower Herrera sands and we predict that the light oil/condensate in Lengua/Lower cruse sands will be evaporatively fractionated and around 50 degrees API and be down -dip PART OF A GIANT OIL FIELD( nowadays giant is defined as 500 million barrels recoverable OR MORE) ‘

The full salivating scenario is available at ‘ lgospeculator.blogspot.com ‘ - it gives shareholders some comfort about the likely reward for the risk they run - I don’t think there are many takers for LayLadyLay’s favourite drill Apex 560 ( in a different area ) .

Once again LLL thanks for stimulating me to dig up the original technical info - I expect we’ll be seeing it in LK ‘s presentations shortly - I can’t wait!

rxdav - thanks for your understanding - you can see from today's exchange with troll LLL what I'm dealing with here - hitherto most observers have highlighted the drilling on Cedros which actually recorded a deep contact with oil but suffered a broken drill and was not followed up.

I do agree with LLL that deeper formations are likely to be more productive for longer periods - that's why the objective is to drill deep, ultimately, but make money as we go by harvesting from a shallower level first before extending.

LayLadyLay - why didn't it surprise me you selected a duster for your example! What are you like !

Facts are that neither you or me are selecting the drill site for this enterprise. I'm not encouraging you to put your cash into it but I'm happy for LK to direct shareholder money into the SWP drilling and await the results - even if we strike favourably you'll still be on here saying ' it was a fluke ' or ' it won't last ' cos that's your MO. LSE permits your trolling but it doesn't stop me from perpetually querying why you are on here making these comments - shareholders have a financial interest in supporting their company and this is understood by most readers of chat boards - your contributions are motivated by errrrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhh no one knows - you've been asked hundreds of times over the years - without a response !

LayLadyLay - I was merely exposing your ludicrous distinction between onshore and offshore- whether there is seawater on top at this moment in history is irrelevant to the chances of finding oil as even you would find it difficult to challenge that it was the conditions millions of years ago that determined the basis of oil formation - i wonder what evidence you have that suggests that SWP does not contain worthwhile reserves - Galpha point is suggestive we are in the zone but don't ask me to guarantee it - I couldn't do that for Irene and she is skilled at brown nosing so you've got no chance!

Can't change my mind about you people trolling - Ross clearly has an agenda for a lower SP and comes up with more and more fantastic scenarios attempting to undermine - but at least he is not afraid to editorialise - you seem frightened to venture an opinion these days - what on earth was all that trawling of Companies House about just to tell us Leo was now resident in Portugal!

rxdav - it's occurred to me that if the subtlety of my comments on dinosaurs was lost on you i might need to explain it for the benefit of other readers - there are plenty of prolific onshore oil fields - the Saudis are probably more likely to end up with oil than water when they go drilling!

rxdav - methinks you misunderstand my position! Firstly I don't filter anyone no matter what Shyte they post. Ross filters pretty much anyone who disagrees with him persistently and that's why I named you as his next potential candidate - the joebop filtering in the meantime was a surprise as joebop is no friend of blatant ramping!

Replying to trolls gives me pleasure and it's permitted under the LSE rules so that's what I've decided to do - sometimes I spin a bit of ramp in there to wind them up and sometimes the suckers take the bait but it informs people and they can't dispute my FACTS.

Thanks for your concerns about my health - responding is cathartic for me - everyone to their own - ATB!

LayLadyLay - it certainly is an IF and those with a Post Office Book attitude to risk should not be sniffing around this share - as I’ve mentioned more than once on here!

Since the area in the vicinity which includes Soldado North has produced some truly spectacular results the shareholders of CERP are supportive of LK to embark on a drilling campaign in SWP despite your non shareholder pessimism - what you think is not our problem!

Your last sentence is clearly absolute rubbish- my statement has basis IN FACT but the ultimate outcome of drilling in SWP is not currently known.

Your theory about onshore and offshore massively interests me - many people hypothesise about the intelligence of dinosaurs and I’m probably with you in thinking they’ve got far too much bad press over the years - some say they could read the signs at Galpha Point ( where there is clear evidence of deposition) that said - ‘ don’t die here because in the future this area will not be under water whereas if you trudge along a wee bit your grave will be in the under water section and it will be a lot more expensive for the oil companies to hoover you up millions of years later ! ‘ . Others speculate that not all dinosaurs had Venezuela Basin friendly passports and that excessively policed border crossing may have influenced ultimate resting places - I think you can see where I’m going with this - this is very close to Rossannan fantasy territory!

Re Dross - this is from his post 31/01/2019 to rxdav - ' There is always someone to talk to, even if it is only newbies looking in.'

Dross - I've just seen the filter advice - my bet was on rxdave as the next one for that honour but I still think it's very likely if they continue exchanging views - Dross likes it all his way!

Joebop - remember it's a badge of honour and it helps to not clog up the board because you can now comment on his posts without the tedium of having to consider his reply - if filtering was such a good idea you wonder why politicians don't do it !

Dross - given the choice of a short sharp slap from joe ( or an assertive correction ) about a matter of fact and you mugging off shareholders here on a saturation basis with naive Shyte until you get the SP you want I believe most shareholders would opt for the former - there's no moral high ground in your campaign to attempt to undermine confidence here - most can see right through it.

rossannan - just read your reply to MrMagoo of 9:53 - you have taken LK's quote out of context to refer to the immediate drilling on SWP and then said ' LK increasingly sounds like an unconvincing salesman ' .

The quote from LK is a visionary quote regarding the transformational aim of the business - if ultimate deep drilling of SWP is remotely similar to say Soldado North with average 15,000 bopd over 50 years then CERP will, in my opinion also, be trading in 'the hundreds of millions ' .

It is worrying that you either don't understand that or you deliberately choose to misrepresent LK views in the way you do for your own personal objectives, without any IMO, which people should attach to their views to distinguish them from fact - constant repetition of a view doesn't make it a fact even if you are becoming increasingly Desperate Dross!

Rugby - IPSC is also subject to SPT, albeit on the net amount, after Royalties - it's on the Trinidad Energy Ministry Site - googlable. You may also remember there was a FAQ on CERP site relating to this subject - I'm sure if SPT didn't apply they would have added that snippet to the reply saying something like ' don't worry about it guys - Goudron oil is exempt' .

You are quite right about the non IPSC being far more profitable than the IPSC deal hence the emphasis given to that area of the business. Despite all the burdens oil production is still capable of generating high returns and if LK meets the Q1 projection commitment to covering ALL GROUP costs this company it will certainly confirm they are on the cusp of a transformation!

rxdav - actually it wasn't specifically targeted at you - I'm not shy of addressing individuals - it was aimed at all who had that reaction to the numbers - i must confess such a reaction was my first thought - but then I gave more consideration to the likely logistics of engineering that 1021 bopd peak and LK's comments about future profitability and how far he had got with developments in the ' new ' fields and decided that even if the peak was just a sop to potential detractors good on him for taking that seriously - now he can get on with managing for sustained profitable production in the future!