George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
'To meet this challenge the world will need to install four times the amount of wind and solar energy than it did in 2020.
This equates to adding a massive solar park every day over the next nine years.'
Lots of fairy land think tank stuff in there. I know we have to strive to implement all of that but I don't think it is possible to do all of that in the time frames they want.
No need to apologise Keefy.
Tony, my message was in response to Ddraig. I'm sure he and most people reading know what I was referring to. I was referring to 2 different things and not comparing them to each other.
1.4b + recoverable is a very good figure. What's willow? 750m? And how much are COP spending to get that online? It was never going to be 26b OIP like Prudhoe Bay. Prudhoe is a geologic freak atop the Barrow Arch. Unfounded ramping just leads to disappointment.
https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/PublicRoom_Alaska_Legacy_Wells_Summary_Report_2013.pdf
I've included coordinates that can be cut and pasted to google maps however i believe some of them are wrong as description in the article will say north or east of umiat but some of the coordinates come up as south of umiat.
Umiat-1 drilled 1945 to 6000ft
69.35821 - 152.086
Trace oil Different crude type to other umiat wells.
Umiat 2 drilled 1947
COORDINATES 69.3821 - 152.886
formation damage due to using freshwater drilling fluid
Umiat 5 drilled near 2 in 1951
69.3836 - 152.0797
Flowed 400 barrels of oil per day
Umiat 3 drilled 1947
69.3867 - 152.0847
flowed 50 barrels per day
Umiat 4
69.3878 - 152.0789
500 barrels of oil produced but doesnt say over how long ago.
Apart from the first that was way too deep all wells were generally less than 1100 ft.
These were 70+ years ago. Imagine how much better they would be with modern drilling and completion techniques.
Umiat needs drilling by August 2022 to keep the lease.
I think that's a different emerald house. One in Alaska prob has zero employees. https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/cbp/main/Search/Entities
Scott-'Point to one matter of fact where I have lied, misled, misdirected. You can't because I don't conduct myself in that manner.'
There's been a few.
26b OIP was the first whopper. Still waiting on the link to evidence that....
A) Farallon being inside whilst selling shares in the market - I NEVER SAID THAT. I MENTIONED THE POSSIBLILITY OF THEM BEING IN A CLOSED PERIOD PRIOR TO WELL RESULTS , OTHERWISE WHY NOT SELL AT 40p+ INSTEAD OF 30p+.
B) Farallon paying bribes to GB founders 'by cheque every month" I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT BRIBES OR ANYTHING ILLEGAL, SEE YOUR COMMENT BELOW*
C) Bob Rosenthal promoting the PANR investment case one evening and then being part of a decision-making process to sell shares in the market the next day. I NEVER SAID THAT AND CLEARLY STATED WAS AT ARMS LENGTH AS PER PANR'S OWN RELEASES BUT IN MY OPINION THE GB GUYS ARE BENEFICIARIES AS PER PANR RNS' ON THE MATTER. HOW COULD THEY NOT BE, THIS PROJECT IS THEIR BABY AND AS YOU POSTED RECENTLY...
' ...as the dominant party within CHONS and holding security over the GB founders' shares, every PANR share sold by Farallon reduces the GB founders' exposure to the asset they first identified.'
'...PRECISELY the GB founders would prefer the exact opposite and for Farallon not to sell one share. How come? Because it further damages the GB founders' financial interests by increasing the dilution they've been enduring over the last 5 years or so even further.'
Apologies to genuine holders as to how this has degenerated on the board ( I really dislike this guy) but I genuinely feel this is worthy of discussion and for holders / investors to look into for themselves. Until the selling stops the brakes are going to be on for any SP movement.
As I posted earlier, F/GB selling at this stage doesn't make sense when the SP should be higher in matter of weeks.
My thoughts are the GB guys are 10 years+ invested in this and would, like everyone, want to make as much money from this project as they can.
By selling they are reducing their stake in the asset....UNLESS they are selling to get funds together to fund one or more drills as a 'farm-in partner' for circa 50% stake in the asset.
PANR could place to raise funds for further drills , MAPS expenditure etc and keep the asset 100% WI, or if they did farm out, why go to someone line Premier or APDC or ANother oiler?? When the GB / Farollan guys could fund the farm in themselves. That is how they would make maximum $$$ from this and would be no detriment to PANR or PANR shareholders.
Good one Scott, haha. You talk out of your orifice. What did you say the other day about Farallon selling GB shares and reducing their interests? Sounded remarkably like what I had said, albeit without the cheque. Maybe it's a bank transfer.
You are correct Cbaron. I bow to your wisdom on that one.
Makes you wonder why the selling though. Derisking?
But why now when surely the SP would be higher in a month's time?
These GB boys have been here a lot longer than we have, I'm trying to work out how they can make as much money as possible which is surely their intention.
Further below 30% but only until they convert their B shares.
Easy to spot these going through. 50k 50k 25k sells going through regularly. Same pattern when there is a placing inbound and worth bearing in mind on any share as can help spot an inbound placing before it's announced. Good for also spotting placing churn ending and then further SP movement. Same with 88 albeit they'd be in 2.5m 5m 10m batches.
Scott, seeing as you're here, can you explain what you meant by these 2 things you posted on May 3rd please?
' ...as the dominant party within CHONS and holding security over the GB founders' shares, every PANR share sold by Farallon reduces the GB founders' exposure to the asset they first identified.'
'...PRECISELY the GB founders would prefer the exact opposite and for Farallon not to sell one share. How come? Because it further damages the GB founders' financial interests by increasing the dilution they've been enduring over the last 5 years or so even further.'
Thank you
PART 2
'Non-voting B Shares
The Company is also proposing to issue and allot up to 115,234,570 non-voting B Shares to Great Bear as part consideration for the Acquisition. Pursuant to the amendment to the Company's existing articles of association to be proposed at the General Meeting, the non-voting B Shares will have no rights to vote at general meetings and annual general meetings (although the holder shall have a right to receive notice of and attend such meetings) and will not be transferable save where: i) the transfer is to an affiliate of the holder of the non-voting B Shares; or, (ii) the transferee is already a holder of non-voting B Shares. In addition, the holders of the non-voting B Shares may transfer or grant security over the non-voting B Shares to a bank or other financial institution. The non-voting B Shares shall not be admitted to trading on AIM or any other market. No conversion of any of the non-voting B Shares may be made without Panel consent or if, immediately following such conversion, the holder of the non-voting B Shares (together with any persons acting in concert as defined in the Code) are or shall become the holders of 30 per cent. or more of the entire issued voting share capital of the Company requiring the making of a mandatory offer pursuant to Rule 9 of the Code. The restriction referred to above, shall not apply in the event an offer for the share capital of the Company (as defined in the Code) is declared unconditional in all respects.'
So Private Investors can fund further drills and in the success case GB can make a mandatory offer for the company