Member Info for investor33

Met1 has no income by the way.

Presumably Met1 will also go bust because it consolidated 10-1 and its share price shot up to 55p and then crashed in 3 weeks to 7p ( or 0.7p without the consolidation) ? It's about 10p now or 1p based on pre consolidation.

Or maybe these types of micro caps are super volatile and the range between the high and the low every year tends to be huge ?

Ok Hamm - fair enough.

It's just been a highly volatile share over the years ,- often a 300 or 400% range between the high and the low of the year.

This last year has been more like a 500% range. Micro caps are incredibly volatile. It was 3.4p back on 22nd August last year.

Look at Met1 recently - up from about 10p after the consolidation to around 55p and then down to 7p just three weeks later. It's what these types of shares are like I'm afraid.

Other

Hamm has to be a trader - he swings from one extreme to the another like a manic depressive.

Hamm - how do you secure a JV without having legal access to the land ? we were only granted that just over a year ago

And the 25 year licence was only granted earlier this year. That one was crucial too.

Up to recently you were saying that the share price wil be 40p by the end of the year and now it's all armageddon talk.

Re H2 with it's 30 bopd - let's remember that the average per well for PC in blocks 19 and 21 is apparently 40 bopd.

Some people have totally unrealistic expectations, and expect every well to produce about 300 bopd.

H1 with iits current 160 bopd would make it one of PC's better producing wells if it was in block 19. Their best ones do 200 to 300 bopd apparently.

Re H2 with it's 30 bopd - let's remember that the average per well for PC in blocks 19 and 21 is apparently 40 bopd.

Some people have totally unrealistic expectations, and expect every well to produce about 300 bopd.

H1 with iits current 160 bopd would make it one of PC's better producing wells if it was in block 19. Their best ones do 200 to 300 bopd apparently.

And whether company lawyers might want to look into it. Especially as some of the comments have been extremely defamatory towards both the company and MB.

Apart from the obvious questions that have already been mentioned on here i t would be good to ask whether the company are aware of and monitor the amount of company bashing which goes on here, given that it seems orchestrated.

And do they think that there's a motive behind it to discourage potential investors ?

Thank goodness for an investor presentation at last.

" Confessions of a Sociopath " is an interesting book to read on the subject - I would guess that adw, SM and aquinut are all sociopaths.

Sociopaths don't have a conscience generally.

About 1 in 25 people are sociopaths, and the ratio of men to women in terms of sociopathy is 3:1. There's not that much of a distinction between psychopathy and sociopathy..Only a sociopath would wish cancer on people and generally wish misfortune and loss on investors.

.

Good comments Manx - you may well be correct with what you are speculating.

At the end of the day on the face of it, the company could have either raised twice as much, or diluted by half as much had they picked their moment.

If there are compelling reasons why they failed to do this - thereby breaching a fiduciary duty to their shareholders - then we need to know what those reasons were.

Funny how a green box always pops up almost immediately as soon as I post....people who claim to be " working from home " but who are focused on what is written here every single minute of the day seemingly...

Re Met1 - the huge sudden interest and volume was stoked up by a series of sponsored articles promoting the company, which the company itself has denounced publicly. They have stated that people should only base investment decisions based on official company info.

Sounds dodgy to me - not sure who was responsible for the sponsored articles.

Hamm - when the share price was around 2.4p - which happened three times this year - there would still have been a large discount attached to it. So the raise might have been at say 1.6p or thereabouts. Still, that's double what was raised with the same no of shares, or alternatively they could have done half the dilution for the same amount raised.

This is the burning question which needs to be answered in the Q&A session. The company has a fiduciary duty under IOM company to act in the best interests of its shareholders. So MB needs to explain why they didn't raise at a much higher share price which was possible in late May.

The advantage to the party going into the forward sales agreement is that they have a decent time to sell their shares to a third party before the issue date becomes due. Logically the longer the gap between the agreement being signed and the issue date, the more it is in their favour to profit, and the least risk they take. They need a decent amount of time to sell their shares on the open market before the open market price reverts to the price that was agreed ( 0.8p) straight after the raise is formally announced.

With that forward sales agreement, it could have been agreed and signed when he share price was nearer 2.3p as has happened three times this year. Then a discount given off that price.

I would like to know what the open market share price was when the 0.8p price was agreed. We have no idea when the forward sales agreement was signed - apparently there is no legal requirement in terms of the time difference between such an agreement being signed and the issue date. It could have been signed two months before the issue date for all we know.