Member Info for investor33

Badprophet ; whether the news is considered ' good ' or ' bad ' is immediately shown by the price action, so for example in the Nasdaq pre-market or full market open the technical indicators will show immediately how the news release is being perceived by the market. Then the algos kick in accordingly. The trigger is ' news ' but the subsequent action is all down to technical indicators which the algos are programmed to work with and act on.

Today there is very low volume on MATD, because short term trading will have moved to other stocks with the right technical indicators which may well have been triggered by some kind of ' news. ' It doesn't always require ' news ' however - a support or resistance level may have triggered trading activity.

Master82 - see my post below about what really drivers short term price action and the sudden spikes followed by sharp pullbacks. It's nothing to do with the way that the RNS was written.

Re short term price movements, I'm not sure how much people realise that most trading these days is algo driven, in other words computers make trading decisions according to the algos with which they have been programmed. Algos are a series of stages, so if x happens then you need to do Y etc.

I watch small cap Nasdaq stocks most days which are high % gainers on the day with very high volume because news to do with that company has just been released. When the news comes out then you often see in the charts several huge green candles with very high volume when the market opens. This is because the computers have registered the news, and are programmed to jump in immediately. So volume ( shares changing hands ) goes through the roof for a short while. Then when certain levels have been reached ( resistance levels etc ) or certain % gains made, the algos trigger sell orders en masse. So the spike is over, and the price levels fall back quite sharply with so much sudden supply flooding the market.

The same kind of thing happens with UK shares. If you take last Friday, when the news hit, half hour volume went up from about 0.2 m soon after the market opened, to 4.85m when the RNS was released, and the algos had therefore just kicked in. By 3pm on Friday the volume had fallen back to around 0.2m. Total volume on Friday was 18.5m and yesterday it was 3.7m. Today so far it's about 0.5m.

Trying to understand short term price action without paying any attention to volume is a bit like trying to fly a plane without instruments. Of course yesterday and today you will hear people saying ' oh, the market isn't convinced, as there are still hitches with the Special Purpose Certification etc.' The reality though is that the sharp spikes followed by sharp pullbacks are caused by algo driven short term trading/scalping which kick in typically when there is some kind of news, so that a particular share registers on that day as a high % gainer on abnormally high volume.

Pro ; if you don't know the difference yet between ' were ' and ' where ' then I'm unlikely to ever bother listening to what you say about stock market investment or trading. You can't even put the cap lock on and off without frequent errors when you write.

Pro - you are as much a professional trader as I am a professional flower arranger.

Pro ; according to a chart I have just looked at, peak half hour volume on Friday was 4.8m, whereas today the peak volume which was at around 8.30am was 1.42m, with most of the half hour volume today being around the 0.15m mark.

Don't you know that when the volume is very low the share price is taken lower by the MMs ?

Pro ; to say that you are a trader you don't seem to know much about volume ( or activity )

Pro ; so go ahead and quote from the Progressive document exactly where it says that a delay in the SPC will hold up PM from going ahead with operations.

It's obvious to anyone with common sense who has read the 22/09/22 RNS, in conjunction with the last RNS that all that is now needed is the signing of the land use agreement - which is currently being prepared by the District authorities.

Wos - I agree totally. I don't know why some are still saying that the SPC is necessary. It was always the plan B option when PM was being frustrated at the local level, as the wording of that 22nd Sept 2022 proves.

Aeschylus - you're welcome.

Doc83 - the Progressive Research document dated 04/03/24 merely says that ' the company still faces a delay with the SPC. ' This is true enough, however the report also states ;

' PM has announced that its application for land access for 2024 operations has been approved by the Matad District Committee. This means that a land use agreement can be prepared, which, once signed, will allow operations to proceed, including the completion of the Heron-1 discovery well as an oil production well. This will allow Petro Matad to start generating cash flow that can be used to grow the business and add shareholder value. "

It doesn't state anywhere that the SPC delay will stop them from going ahead.

Pro ; From the 22nd September 2022 RNS ;

"Multiple requests by the Company and other operators for land access permission have been rejected without explanation by the local authorities. Anticipating this situation at the local level, Petro Matad pushed for central government to take action to certify the Company's Block XX Exploitation Area as a Special Purpose Area, streamlining the approvals process, and to remedy the contradictions in the land law."

Aeschylus : it stated in a previous RNS that the special purpose certification was being pursued as a plan B.

It would be daft though not to finish off the process given the time and effort which must have gone into it, plus with the government having already approved it. I don't believe that it's necessary now, however it's another insurance policy which is extremely useful to have anyway.

Pro : In don't believe that ultimately the Special Purpose certification is necessary, as right now I presume that some think that it is an essential factor in countering the land overlap objection. There are two other compelling reasons why this objection is not valid however, without even using the Special Purpose designation.

PM are still pursuing the Special Purpose cert however, as they had already spent time and effort trying to obtain it, and the government has already approved it. It's just another insurance policy which they may as well have handy just in case.

I thought the whole idea of the SSPL was for it to be an insurance policy in case the LP couldn't be obtained ? In other words a plan B to allow for work to commence this year if the LP application kept on getting held up.

Now people are saying that both will be necessary, even though the SSPL probably wouldn't be necessary to prove the Protected Land objection to be invalid, given that there are two other compelling factors which counter the flimsy objection raised by the governor.

Well this latest feeble and somewhat desperate attempt by the governor to thwart PM is a non-starter on three separate counts. I presume that any of the three points below would render his objection invalid ;

1) Heron 1 is not on the overlapped land.

2) PSC was signed in 2006 - so many years before the Province created the Protected Land status for the overlapping part. As the RNS stated - it's the Province which is in breach.

3) The Land Law allows the gvt to take Protected Land for Special Purpose use, and the government has already designated the land as Special Purpose, even if the tripartite agreement has not been signed by the governor.

Clearly this governor has some kind of an agenda against PM, and therefore its shareholders, however I can't see that this flimsy objection does anything except reveal how desperate he is to impede PM.

By the way - what happened to the compensation payments to the herds people, and how exactly did the governor originally convey his intention to sign the tripartite agreement once the Provincial government had received the funds ? That latter point is important I would say - was it just communicated verbally or in writing ?

Researchandhold ; funny that we both hold a very similar quantity of shares at an almost identical average price !

What you wrote makes sense regarding DQE and PC.

Good luck to you as well - after all this time I think we deserve some good fortune. It's certainly has been a rather stressful experience at times, with so many twists and turns . It has been hard to keep the faith at times, however I now feel pretty positive about our prospects for the near future.

@Thornogson : at least what I write is reasonably coherent and legible. And I know the difference between ' there ' and ' their. '

Everybody makes the odd typos with grammar or spelling - I'm sure that you do too - but the likes of 'Professional ' give the impression that they never attended a school.

My point is that if someone writes in an incoherent and illegible manner, then it's hard to take their investment or trading opinions seriously. If WOS is not European then I will make an exception for him.

Badprophet ; what do you mean when you say you have consistently wished all the LTHs good fortune ?

Just about every day that the share price has dipped you have been on here gloating, and basically revelling at every possible opportunity in schadenfreude. You even started carping on about how it looked certain that PM would be going bankrupt soon.

You have not shown the slightest bit of sensitivity to the emotions of the LTHs on here - so cut out the hypocrisy please.

Researchandhold : I also bought shares over a series of tranches starting in 2019, ending up with a similar number of shares to you. So we are in a very similar position. It has been incredibly galling to watch profits on the numerous spikes dissolve into heavy paper losses several times over during that time. I could have taken out decent profits and then bought back in much lower. My worst mistake was when I got caught out buying about £4,000 worth during the 8p spike when the exploitation licence was granted, just before the subsequent raise which was announced straight after. My average is 4.1p.

Hopefully it will be calmer waters ahead - though I am tempted to sell a portion if we reach 7 or 8p with a view to reinvesting some of the profits if there is another raise. Without a signed contract with DQE a raise is surely only a matter of time. I would guess that they will announce another raise once the LP documentation is finalised.

It's odd that nothing more has been said about the signing of the DQE contract - we were told that it was with them awaiting a signature months ago. Maybe they won't sign until the LP permits are finalised ? Perhaps it's the same with PC?

' It doesn't ' I meant. My own grammar typo - however that's just one in a medium longish post. Not 20 or 30 mistakes in just a single post written in almost illegible English...