Member Info for Juxtapose

If the BOD had good news, it would be shouted from the rooftops. Anyone can see that at this level, one stellar announcement would reduce RH's holding into the insignificant category and with that, the remaining shorts will be closed, as the RH dumping exit route is cut off. There is no other way. JW really does need to get the current year Plat. drilling show on the road and it would help if they would update in other areas, such as CPO-5 and the proposed drilling of Put 8 from another block by Vetra. Only imagine the expectations if we had drill bits turning in 3 blocks simultaneously! For information, SOL was marginally up from 12,215,886 to 12,996,775 at the end of February, so minimal affect in February.

It makes no odds: both are buys and both are saying (ITO) this is as low as it gets. We must be close to announcements on Indico and Sol and they have the potential to fry shorters: for them, limited additional downside and unlimited upside exposure. The problem for them is volume, which is insufficient to make a mass exodus and I don't think RH "helps" below 20p. ANH approval would also certainly improve sentiment: not so sure about Ecuador, unless we get a block that is already producing. Too many will just see it as more "jamorrow"?.

BH Just for information, the SOL figures are reducing, indicating that shorters are closing. Nov. 19,118,572 Dec. 14,354,812 Jan. 12,215,886 So, R & M clearly scared them and 7 million closed at the back end of Dec. and Jan. and accounted for the rise (into which RH gratefully sold....) As far as any of us is aware, Bakoven, the ANH (environmentals) were due to be signed off in December (having been submitted in August). The last update, in the GC interview, was that they were "well down the road with the Colombians). Meanwhile, the rig sits idle and at this rate, AMER will have the additional capacity on the OBA (the pumping station upgrade) complete before they start drilling! Time for GC perhaps to talk "cricket" to the Colombians. Whilst any potential Ecuadorean acquisition is of interest, given the "land bank" that we already have, drilling must be the priority. Gran Tierra is an interesting comparison. In every respect it is the far greater risk taker: debt and even down to costing its drilling campaign on oil at $57, whereas our lot have done the exercise on $45 (unless, of course, it has no option as costs are greater: I have not checked), One huge gulf is that AMER have assets acquired for peanuts (see our CPO-5/Petro Dorado "nil cost" after tax losses against their Petro Latina, standing at a cool half a billion. A penny for Dana Cofield's thoughts on the comparison?

Operational management is about measuring performance against targets. Bean counters always look to cutting costs ie making existing operations more profitable and that is dull, but useful: It is a survival rather than growth strategy and was appropriate for the times of oil at $30 per barrel. Now, I want to see the growth and getting the environmental extension timeously was key to that. it was about organisation, not money. If any under staffing is for financial reasons, then I would point to to top heavy management costs, particularly JW: a whole tribe could be paid for the money he earns and so, not unreasonably, I expect him to do a tribe's work and that includes multi tasking: building new pipe lines/pumping stations plus drilling and progressing all of the blocks on permissions ready for the operational plans. The simple fixed overheads to gross profit equation dictates that failure to add profitable growth is always time completely wasted.

With oil at $30, it was, of course, the right strategy to stop pumping the more expensive oil, but by April 2016,POO had recovered and has rarely dipped below that magical $45 so often cited as the price at which they can fund their exploration and development program. That became the figure post OBA as prior to that, a higher figure would have been required, but in a blame culture, whose fault was that? Whilst we may all take different dates, surely we can agree that it is infuriating to see 2018, indisputably a time of super profits, melting away whilst the Serinco Rig sits idle? The "Aramco" effect on POO may not extend into 2019 and this is an extraordinary window of opportunity being missed. I still see a first class strategy, but is operational management being properly scrutinized?

Well. once again they have managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. The blindingly obvious is that they were supposed to be drilling the "N" sands starting this Q and nothing has happened. They are apparently "well down the road" with the Colombians, but the original submission of the environmental upgrade was done in August, with an expected finalization date of December : clearly, if they were to get going this Q, they needed to have got that submission in much earlier. Once again, the buzz has petered out: meanwhile, the competitors in Colombia forge ahead. What makes this organizational incompetence so criminal is that with the current POO, this is the time to be pumping. The NEDs need to hold JW's feet to the fire. For the salary, we should have a CEO capable of multi tasking (or more people on less money, if additional boots are needed on the ground).

Tender out for civil works, apparently. It makes sense to drill back to back wells as Indico 1 and Sol are close, but also a vote of confidence in CPO-5: starting to gather momentum now.. Surely that should make those shorts want to close PDQ.

Heather, Administration costs are always far more in the first half of the year. 2015 1st half 8081 2nd half 3378 2016 1st half 7038 2nd half 4857 2017 1st half 7233 2nd half: probably between 4 m. and 4.5 m. Annual figure fairly consistent at 11.5 m, a large part of which is employment costs. H2 will be profitable with lower admin. greater volume and increased POO. This year will be in a different league.

No one would play ball if there was not at least a minimum guaranteed and there will be a compensation clause in the agreement. The issue for us is that at $10 per barrel on the 5000 minimum payback for capex is a year and from there on in, we make an annual additional profit if that amount. Both parties were obviously happy with the deal at the time, as they signed it and went ahead. Both parties are still happy, as they have now done more business together and with promises of yet more to come: net working contacts at its best.

This being a growth play, the P/E ratio is too simplistic as a means of judging whether or not it is undervalued (and therefore worth a punt). PER is a better metric, albeit more subjective, since it takes into account projected exploitation of reserves (existing and some near term exploration opportunities, most significantly, the N sands) and the current POO. Current earnings are only important in so far as they provide the means of exploiting our assets, the 940,000 hectares in Colombia, with 1408 million barrels of unrisked: the vital statistic is how many wells at �5 million per well are funded at a net operating return of $49 per barrel and the current level of production. Even bean counters will come up with different numbers, but most would agree that valuing a growth company on a purely historical data is unlikely to be useful. As far as peer group is concerned, the sector indices are dominated by the majors and therefore not a valid benchmark: better comparisons are to be made with our Colombian competitors (and possibly purchasers) and other junior mid tier explorers, capable of self funding.

Traders taking profits, as the share rose swiftly from the December lows of the 16s to the 22s at the beginning of last week (over 30%)?. Unless we are notified, then there is no major seller: there were very few single large trades in the last week excluding UTs (only 3 over the last week, 2 of which were definitely buys) and no obvious repeat figure, as a drip feed. It takes time to work out lows (this is where knowledge of charting is a real advantage) and we are getting higher lows: less investors to sell at a profit as those buying sub 20p have already exited with their profit (or are likely to hold such as the BOD and River & Mercantile). Volume is drying up, which also indicates that there is no big seller pumping limitless shares into the market. Yesterday's RNS, as well as being really good news, also indicated that production will continue on target. Together with the current POO, that gives a daily net operating return of over $300,000 and that eventually will attract and keep investors, who can see that such cash flow will internally fund exceptional growth. It will be interesting to see how much of the SOL brigade are still toughing it out. Others may have a different view, but that is what makes this an interesting discussion.

The answer is probably not at all. In December all of our Platinillo production went down the pipeline (CPO-5, of course does not and therefore needs to be deducted from total production). Per the December report on the OBA "Average daily throughput was 6,152 BO during the Period". These are minimums, not maximums. One of the interesting points in the GC interview, was re blending of oil, the N sands 20 degrees API with the 30 degrees we get from the current out put. Towards port, the other pipeline alternates light and heavy: perhaps a blended product is more in keeping with the general flow? There were other plans as well, detailed in a presentation re additional pipelines: maybe that is the subject up for discussion with the President and a combined oil and infra structure company would always be more desirable than oil only (some of the Llanos premiums on purchase have included pipe line capacity on the Caribbean route as part of the deal).

Its all about a "can do" attitude. The plans for the Chiritza pumping station were completed some time ago, but the work was not done, until AMER step in. There will be every incentive to deliver this on time: increased profitability on our own oil and showcasing what we are capable of doing and that is precisely what Ecuador is currently looking for, re blocks and infra structure. As others have said, it does make the GC visit next month to the President of Ecuador, quite intriguing. "a place of opportunities as well as the pipeline" Good to see them hit the ground running: " The Company is currently in the process of procuring goods and services to fulfill its commitments under the Second Agreement" they only got the signed agreement on Friday!.

In the recent AMER CEO interview, the question of dividends was raised in the context of the $300,000 net operating return per day (at the current POO and will increase, as they move towards the 12k and 20k Bopd targets for 2018 and 2019). Firstly, it was made clear that with this revenue and wells costing under $5m, it was self funding. Secondly, the stated objective was growth and capital return. They already have nearly a million hectares with many good leads and 1408 million barrels of unrisked (much collected in the last 3 years for no money) and the program is targeted on that : CPO-5 and the areas closest to the OBA. Their strategy is to sell CPO-5 post the 2nd well and there is speculation as to whether that capital receipt would be reinvested (used to acquire Ecuadorean assets across the river which are a continuation of the geology) or end up as a special distribution. The target will be ultra conservative if that second CPO-5 well, Indico, performs as expected: it will be interesting to see how Mariposa affects the year end reserves calculations.

Perhaps GC has spent too much time presenting to the corporate world? Appealing to the pump and dump brigade is all very well, as they are here today and gone tomorrow, but the over-egged pudding has an unhappy habit of destroying on going credibility, needed to attract and keep the institutional investors. He started with facts, the vital statistics. 12 blocks 940,00 hectares 1408 million barrels of unrisked Own oil pipe. Social unrest was in a response to Malcy's question. Instead of ducking it, we got the history of Colombia in the least possible words: a long struggle, at its height in the 90's, winding down, exhaustion, peace and the eradication of coca "men have to give up guns and stop doing things that are illegal". Next the exit rate: 7000, but the focus on mega profitability: at $65 net operating return of $49 A sum so simple that even PIs should have been able to calculate the result (and for those who were not, he returned to those numbers and spelled out the figures, $300,000 a day. On Mariposa, "very optimistic valuations by analysts" and the "for sale" sign up "a lot of people very interested" and Llanos 34 parex and Geo "huge success in the Une sands" The Indiands "proud" and so it goes on, a confident and positive presentation rooted in fact, pointed at growth and capital return, but seemingly not to the taste of the PI?

Recovery stocks can have great potential, Tweedle. As you like charts, try plotting POO over the 5 year AMER. In some respects, 2018 offers one of the greatest opportunities that punters are likely to ever have, a commodity stock where the commodity price is going to be supported for the year by Saudi Arabia, in their own interests, (seeking to offload Aramco at the best possible price). What AMER represents is a low risk (debt free) opportunity to capitalize on that, with one of the best prospects, CPO-5, planned in H1. There has been growth through last year to the 7000 exit rate on production, revenue and profitability: eventually, the market recognizes this, but (as was also the case with SLP) the SP re rates. The trick with recovery stocks is pick producers, with good management and that excludes most of the rubbish on AIM.

Some interesting comparisons between SLP and this, Leas. That was the 2016/17 steal of the century, ticking all of the boxes, good management , established business and cash/asset rich, but trashed by the forced sale as Miton liquidated due to the funds shrinking (2 managers left Miton): under 8p was a gift, but the market treated it like a Trojan horse. Here we have a similar gift, for a mix of reasons and the market again treats it as a wooden horse, skirting round it with skepticism and refusing to accept the blindingly obvious, net operating return of $49 per barrel on 7000 BOPD = over $300,000 per day (rounding down) at the current POO. Patience was and still is being handsomely rewarded on SLP and when the market finally shakes off its trader mentality here and looks at the fundamental case, we should see this do likewise. Good luck on SLP.

Tweedle No reason whatsoever to think that the current sell off is any thing other than traders taking a bit of profit. The whole mantra of Rex Harbour Rex Harbour Rex Harbour is over done. The BOD have been held to account on this issue and now would not dare to let him sell through a thresh hold without doing the necessary ie. creating a level playing field by putting the information in the public domain. The last notification was early October (re a September date) and so we can categorically say that he has not yet sold off enough to take him through the next thresh hold. As each day goes by, the calculated average drops and is now approaching negligible. Until we either get a further notification or the Aim rule 26 information is updated, the reasonable assumption is that he is not selling in any size, or sufficient to affect the SP. Whilst Rex Harbour did object to the remuneration, it is over simplistic to suggest that he has a continuing vendetta with the board and is therefore cutting off his nose to spit his face. Whilst he does seem to make some bad investment decisions, surely even he (or his advisers) must be able to see that 2018 is going to to be the year of oil and that CPO-5 could be one of the most exciting discoveries of the year (possibly accounting for the whole of the current SP and perhaps much of that to be distributed by way of capital reduction?). As for the suggestion this will all take years, Indico is scheduled for H1 and we have already, thanks to JTD's kindly shared research I think, seen various tenders go out, so I would say weeks rather than years.

BH That is a very interesting post from you on our neighbours and just the sort of insight that I would hope to gain from a discussion of the interview: few seem to have even noticed that comment from GC, let alone shed any further light on such an innovative proposal.: I assumed it was Plat 8, but your detail probably makes more sense. If that goes ahead, along with the N sands and Indico, the year ahead could be really exciting for LTHs' GC was a bit of a tease on CPO-5 "very optimistic valuations by analysts" and it would be interesting to know if that will be applied to "drilling as much as possible" ie growth or capital return A lot, I suppose, will depend on the amount generated by the 7000 BOPD per day: at the current POO, that $300,000 per day funding wells at $5 million, looks to be more than adequate, but CPO-5 proceeds could really escalate the growth exponentially.

It might be appropriate to use the word "decimated" in respect of the cash balance, if it had been wholly expended to no purpose, but that is clearly not the case. To put it into context, would you prefer to A. have a couple of million more cash at bank. or B.have Mariposa, now pumping 1000 + BOPD If the answer is "A", then you should be invested in funds, rather than oil and gas exploration.