Member Info for investor33

Devon ; do you mean who has 12m shares ? I believe it was Manx who said this is his holding.

It's still small of course compared to Petrovis ' 200m or so shares.

I think people tend to forget when they rubbish MATD and its Board that Petrovis' reputation as the parent company is also at stake here. And Petrovois so far have been winners.

The company which this Aquisace was raving about a few weeks ago Met1 - " it's so much better than MATD" - has now tanked from 55p to 10p in about three weeks....

Turns out it was yet another huge pump and dump.

Doc thinks that you're " an oddball " if you talk about charts. So I assume he's not paying any attention to what someone posted on the BME board ;

" Read the charts . They tell you everything you need to know. If you don't know how to read then learn.

Look into the MACD

Price Channel

RsI

Stochastic

This is only going lower."

All indicators which I use by the way.

Someone else on here has about 12m shares apparently.

Thanks for letting us know Thorno.

Cormie - thanks for you thoughts. It's good that you are so upbeat having held for so long. Hopefully it will come good for all of us.

Cormie - given that you said that you've held for some 14 years now, as a matter of interest what kind of average do you have ?

Furry ; " there is another thing to consider with the position of drilling the wells, MB is actually a qualified Geologist it was his role many years ago, so, I would think he would have an opinion on drilling unless he just delegated "

Maybe. He did defer to this guy Jerry though for answering investor technical questions in the investor presentation.

What I would disagree with Master about, is that IMO the decision to space the two wells so far apart was almost certainly down to the professional judgement of the technical director, who I think is called Jerry. I might be wrong, but I would have thought that MB simply took his advice and then approved it.

In the investor presentation MB deferred to this guy, Jerry, for technical explanations in response to investor questions.

"Petro China have hundreds of wells, some good, some indifferent and some bad. You drill your hole and see what happens."

PC were not a micro cap company with extremely limited funds when they started on Block 19 and 21. Nor were those wells the first ones they had done as an oil producer. Quite the opposite.

The first two wells for a tiny company moving from explorer to producer are obviously critical - particularly if up to that point it had relied on frequent raises on the open market in order to fund itself. H2 should have been regarded as a banker well, and with hindsight it now seems that positioning it 700m away from H1 was not the least risky option to have taken.

" drill a duster relatively close to H1 " I meant.

Considering that they were working off PC's 3D seismic data, I still find it hard to understand how they managed to drill a duster relatively else enough to H1.

As ' the Naked Investor ' mentions in his books, a duster can result in an oiler share price being hit instantly for 40%.

1.4p now without the consolidation...

I tend to agree with you Master. I think that most likely it was the technical director ( Jerry ? ) who screwed up when a decision was made to drill H2 some 700m away from H1. I presume that the technical director would have the say about this ?

It should have been an absolute banker well that they were looking for with the second drill, and that would have meant drilling within 300m or so of H1.

Over 300 bopd from the two combined would have made a big difference at this stage. and it wouldn't have given the MMs the ammunition they needed to batter the share price in mid November 24.

Another thought I had is that if the shareholder base is made up of let's say about 1,000 PIs, then it's highly likely that many of these have held for several years, and are keen to make some kind of profit and then move on. Bagholding for a long time is never a good thing, and that cash could be deployed elsewhere.

Therefore in order to get the shareholders to vote in favour of what the Board recommends in terms of either a takeover or the sale of Block 20, you would want this kind of longstanding shareholder base rather than an army of new holders brought in through a raise on the open market. These newer shareholders would most likely want to hold out for a bigger ROI from their recently acquired shares.

Therefore MATD must be keen to keep the shareholder base as low as possible right now. Plus Petrovis will not want to have their 200m or so shares diluted any further, unless they increase their % ownership of the company and thereby average down.

Abzzba ; " It wouldnt surprise me if Aquisace was Adw, just another of his junk accounts, how many of those have we had in the last 6 months."

I seem to remember that both " coincidently " said that they had lost 4K with their MATD shares. Maybe a faux pas in an unguarded moment to give the game away ?

I agree Master. They should have copied PC, and drilled more like 300m max away from H1.

At least PC or any other interested party will no doubt be aware that MATD probably doesn't have enough expertise or experience to develop Block 20, so therefore the H2 result wont impact on their assessment of the potential of Block 20. And especially as there is 3D data available for the northern portion of Block 20, courtesy of PC.

Thinking about it, if more equity ever needed to be raised, then IMO it's almost certain that it would not be done on the open market ( sorry Doc, Adw and Aquisace....) but rather through Petrovis increasing its share of the company.

At the very low current share price, this would bring Petrovis' average down - a big plus from their point of view.

It would also mean that in the event of a takeover, Petrovis would own a larger % of the company, and therefore make it easier for the Board to achieve shareholder approval of its recommendation as to whether to accept the offer or not. Presumably this would also apply to a sale of Block 20 ? I assume that this would also require a shareholder vote ?

Thorno ; according to Master, DQE have moved finished their work at Block 19 now, and have moved away. Hopefully Block 20 will be next.

RealPro ; " ADW "Can whoever investor hasn't currently filtered ask him why he's sharing comments made about another company on this message board?"

Probably the most sensible observation from all of last nights posts imo. "

FYI the answer is that one of the trolls on here was recently trying to persuade MATD shareholders that their shares are pretty well worthless compared to Met1 shares. So quoting some Met1 shareholders, who are mortified at all the dilution with their shares, and the current crash in its share price is actually very relevant to this board.

It also shows that the issue of dilution and raises is far from being specific to MATD as the negs always seem to try to make it look in order to suit their questionable agendas.