Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
Patience is a rare commodity for some. If you have a decent job and a regular income, then you can afford to be patient. But some here don't. Some have been invested here for over four years (more for those who came in in the Tangiers days) and the continual bleatings for patience fall hard on the ears. Perhaps for reasons of age or ill health, time may be running out and while we know oil exploration is a lengthy and slow process, many put their cash in on the premise that it was company policy to prove up and sell up as quickly as possible. I for one never imagined as soon as possible could mean around five years. So all I ask is that DW comes up with the 'transformational ' news he promised would materialise within the 9 months from October last year. His words, not mine. I hung in on that premise, as I've no doubt did many others. So come on David, deliver! That way, I might be able to give my family a summer holiday this year. Otherwise it's the back garden...
If we are not bought out completely within a year, I'll be astonished. DW's stated intent from the very start was prove up what we could and then sell up to remove the risk from us and move it onto someone else. That's the reason I and probably many others invested. I'm trusting Wall to keep to his word.
Rossowheels...I agree. The HRZ will form a very important factor in our value and we can expect a forecast on that soon, I would imagine (but might be wrong). If you couple that with the FO news still to be ratified, and I think our partner would be eminently sensible to look at both as a whole, that takes us into a different stratosphere. And we have other interests. I sometimes wonder when I look at some postings here whether folk are not really reading what's been said by the company - 2-3p for all our potential? I realise people we say we haven't produced any oil, which is true. But we were never set up to - it was always prove, let others take the weight, and we go with a healthy profit. I think we will be gone much sooner than many expect - and Banjo2, 10-20p is indeed transformational, although I am hoping for more than that, with fingers and toes crossed and a few prayers to the oil Gods. If folk bought at 0.03p, as some did, 10-20p is indeed transformational. And even if you bought on the spike at 4.3p (from memory) then 10-20p is still huge - you won't get that return from the Nationwide, but rather 1-1.5% pa. Of course the whole thing could still go belly up - but it seems to me increasingly unlikely and I think we might see an early-ish buyout after proper oil exploration is carried out. Only in my humble and uninformed opinion, of course, with respect to those who think otherwise.
The intention was never to produce oil to any serious level but merely to prove up and sell on, to allow others to do the heavy lifting , in return for a (probably substantial) share of the assets. None of us here knows what the deal will be or form it will take. But I think simple arithmetic might give us a clue soon, so guesses of 10p are just as legitimate at this stage as 2 or 3p. We nust don't know yet. We will also see what Wall's definition of 'transformational' is. So all to play for.
Wall said in October 2018 that the next nine months would be 'transformational' for shareholders. The timescale he stipulated is almost upon us. All I and others ask is that he and the company adhere to that statement .
Sorry to hear about your missus losing her job, Neversatisfied. Another reason from your point of view for David to adhere to what he said. And yes I know farm out deals are complex and involved but surely he knew of the high chances of protracted discussion and factored that in before announcing a timeframe for completion?
Take your point, 5laws. Purely due to my personal circumstances, which some long termers here will know, I need this to come in sharpish and that no doubt influences my thoughts. Some can afford to hang on...others have patiently waited and trust in what the company says. But what will be will be!!
The warming reassurance I have seen so far was when Wall said in October that the next nine months for shareholders would be 'transformational'. The predictions here over the past week or so, admittedly guesswork like my own, that we might see a rise to 1p, 1.5p to 3p are hardly transformational. It has been suggested that Wall didn't mean in terms of the sp, but rather a deal with a major. But surely shareholders see the financial gain as being most important rather than some remote deal which might or might not come to fruition? I take Wall to mean a farm out will reward us financially within that 9-month period and for me, 1-3p is not that. He said that a time when he knew some folk had bought on the spike at 4p plus. I assume he meant a serious deal encompassing several parts of our interests. Anything less will be a massive disaster for me and many others.All only my opinion, of course.
Incidentally, Learningtoinvest, Wall has not set his stall out at 3p at all. The remuneration committee did that as an incentive and he had no say over it . It's a normal company scheme. I am sure that if we were able to ask Wall if his FO target was 1.5-3p, he would be at the very least curious. Olddad has suggested that he wasn't talking about the sp when he said transformational and he might be right. But for most investors, we view success as the rise in our our shareholder value, not some far-off arrangement when we might or might not see a return. Transformational in nine months is what he said. We have a right to expect that he will fulfil his ambitions for us to a degree within that 9 months and 3p is not it.
Apologies for typos. On a shuggley bus to the airport. Don't see why you're amazed. 3p is not tranformational under any circumstances. I'm entitled to my view, as you are. All I'm asking is for this company to adhere to the premise which enticed many to invest. I've been here five years and have the right to express my frustration.
I am taking Wall on trust when he says the 9 month he mentioned woukd be 'transformational '. I see dp suggestions of 1.5-5p mentioned here today. For only a very few here wpuld that be transformational. If that's whatbit ends up as, I gor one will be bitterly disappoined. If you bought even at 3p, how is 1.5p transformational? I am hoping he's agreed a deal for both Icewine plays plus got intere in Yukon etc. I don't know how that will affect the sp but 3p doesn't cut it. I also see talk of 2, 3, 5 years ongoing. Whit? The whole concept of this company eas prove up what we can and sell sharpish. I and probably many more invested on that premise. Anything less is a massive disappointment.
Thanks Jof. But isn't our potential resource much bigger? I think Wall knows that when addressing shareholders and talking about 'transformational', they will assume he means in terms of the sp. I know I do!
Lots of interesting posts today in the wake of the latest RNS. Interesting sp predictions too, from 3p to 30p (although the 30p one was rather tongue in cheek). But I remember Wall saying last October the 'next 9 months will be transformational for shareholders'. If the FO results in us achieving 3p, I for one will be bitterly disappointed. If you bought at peak of 4.3 (roughly) then you won't see 3p as transformational. Surely (with an admitted degree of wishful thinking) the FO will mean at least a meaningful uplift when linked to further news? Roll on June.
I've seen some speculation here recently about what the SP might be after a potential farm out. Someone said 1.5-2p. In October last year, Wall said it would be 'transformational' for shareholders. I sincerely hope by that he didn't mean 1.5-2p. I also see someone here claiming it won't be transformational. How do we know? After four and a bit years, I sincerely hope it will be. Mr Wall said so and having met him, albeit briefly and superficially over a beer, I have faith in what he says. If and when the FO or FOs happen, I can't imagine he will tell shareholders the result of that will be an SP of 2p. The usual caveat applies - this is a total guess.
Agreed about the overreaction, also the 2-3p buyout suggestion being a failure. But I don't think for a minute Wall would agree to a takeout at that price. He said three years ago he had already knocked back an offer and you would have to inagine it would have been at least that and possibly more. I think - maybe hope - that if we were to be the subject of an early and cheeky buyout bid it would be considerably north of that. But we still have much to prove although I read something into the shale and conventional f/os both now being targeted for Q2, along with the Yukon reference. But I speculate only, could be far to early for that.
Seems to me people selling and criticising today are largely doing so on on the basis of the clause about there being no gaurantee that a farm out will take place and of course the MMs historically have needed no encouragement to play this share like a fiddle. That clause is a normal rider inserted as industry standard in farm outs. It's like people shreiking 'I told you so' when a similar clause is inserted around estimations of resource, the number of barrels in the ground, when any RNS says these are estimated and may change. Think Monty! I felt this report said little we don't already know and is a necessary holding statement confirming farm out talks are underway but not complete. I also note both shale and conventional f/os are planned for Q2. This reinforces my view that, with the added detail on Yukon, that we might be the subject of a speculative (and possibly cheap) buy out sooner rather than later, which was the stated intent at the outset. I'm also happy to admit I could be entirely wrong and my speculation is bollox.
Perhaps, Silver Trader. But 5p per share would mean that even those who bought at the very temporary peak of around 4.3p would make a slim profit. I've mentioned before that despite all the most optimistic predictions, even if we managed to find a billion barrels recoverable across all our large acreage and exchange it for a dollar a barrel in return for research and drilling agreements , divided by the shares in situ, all of us would see a decent return. Of course, we might never find anything recoverable and could end up with zero. But it would good if we could find put either way sooner rather than this dragging on for another few years.