The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
BP, Shell, Tullow, EnQuest, Hurricane all either up or treading water at least. PMO is annoyingly 3% down. Could this be due to limit sell orders being triggered earlier today at £1? If so then hopefully this is the last chance to buy below £1......until the next time of course 🤔
Love_you - ‘It's just not good enough for a company of Premier's size to only progress one project of sufficient economic scale to be really worthwhile during an entire decade.‘ Isn’t Zama big enough? How about Tolmount too? .....and then there’s Sealion
It would be interesting to see if the SPR has mysteriously reduced over the last few weeks. It’s a shame that those storage figures aren’t published weekly at the same time.
Maybe the market is now focusing on the July Brent contract price which is almost $1 lower than the June contract?
Simon ‘Harry’ Potter has been showing wizards of the oil industry around the company’s Chamber of Secrets for far too long. Maybe all it really needs is for Petronas/Patronus to appear and save the day?
As has been explained several times in the past, for someone to take a short position they need to be in possession of the shares to begin with. Normally this is achieved by ‘borrowing’ the shares from someone who owns them rather than buying them in the first place. If you own shares through a nominee account it’s unlikely that you will need to give permission for those share to be lent to someone. (The same also applies if you have a long position on a spread bet account.) One of the easiest ways of stopping your shares being lent to a short-seller is to set a limit order against them to sell them at higher price than they are currently trading. If you set the price above what you’d be happy to sell your shares at then it won’t be triggered at a price that you’ll be disappointed by. My understanding is that if all holders had sell orders in place, the shares couldn’t be shorted at all. Give it a try for peace of mind. Who knows, it might be enough to help the share price improve.
Apparently it was a company Golf Day at Gold in Sacks today. They’re back at work tomorrow so the SP will be back in the approved 72 - 75p range again.
Thanks. Let’s hope that’s soon!
Any views on when there will be a decision on the EA? It was filed last summer so hopefully the process should be completed soon with a positive outcome.
Oil up. PMO down. Confused or abused? Surely Chevron was factored into the price already.
Given how overly sensitive the SP is to any news that can be considered to be either negative or risky, we’ll probably see a dip in the price on Monday morning as a result of this article. Buying opportunity?
coming to the rescue??
Fully understood NST, but Wisdom’s original post simply made the point that 65p was closer to 35p than it was to £1. Members had said that that was incorrect, but it’s not (I.e. 30p vs 35p) Enough said?
I’m not a maths expert and don’t want to split hairs, but my calculator shows that 65p is nearer to 35p than to a £1 (30p vs 35p) That makes Wisdom’s post correct.
‘Worth a total of’ not ‘’with a total of’
The only reason for buying RKH would be because PMO already has a commitment to spend up to $722 million on developing RKH’s 40% share of Sealion. PMO get nothing in return for this BUT for an extra £200 million (say), they could own this 40% of Sealion. I suppose the question could be rephrased by saying is Sealion in it’s current state with a total of £500 million (ish). If it’s worth more then buying RKH for £200 million would look like a good investment. If it’s worth less then it wouldn’t.
WJMFLP My post was a simple question that looked at the current market price of Rockhopper and the likely development cost carry for PMO. It’s not very healthy or mature to respond to a question by describing it as ‘ridiculous’ as it’s likely to stifle debate. I don’t understand the workings behind the figures that you’ve mentioned and would be grateful for further explanation. The other point to raise is that RKH may be able to obtain 100% of Sealion by waiting for PMO to fail to develop it but RKH would then need to find 100% of the development costs too.
Fully understood and agreed. The PMO SP does still seem to be suffering from negative sentiment re debt rather than expected future financial returns. Hopefully that will change soon.
Thanks! Best regards (Br)
Understood, thanks, but for the sake of the discussion if we separate funding from financial viability, payment of an extra, say, £200 million for 40% of the future income from Sealion still sounds like a good investment to me? It would also mean that the ownership of Sealion is totally simplified (100% owned by PMO with no development carry obligations), so a subsequent farm out should be much easier to structure and deliver? Thoughts welcomed.