Member Info for labrat99

Repeat posting about events that have actually occurred such as the dilutions are tedious, but repeat posts about big news coming is fine. Some have been claiming big news since April and this is becoming tedious.

Applying that logic they will never be published then as things will be changing today, changing tomorrow and changing in six months. Always an excuse, there has to be a cut-off date. Should have been released at 7am no excuses, another RNS could easily have be released later to update anything else.

The accounts in previous years have been published at 7am on the 30th June, so in comparison to previous years they are late. Maybe RC is having a lie in. Only had six months to release them, RC the caring CEO with shareholders interests as his main focus.

http://www.lseg.com/sites/default/files/content/documents/AIM%20Rules%20for%20Companies%20-%20January%202016.pdf Page 9 "An AIM company must publish annual audited accounts which must be sent to its shareholders without delay and in any event not later than six months after the end of the financial year to which they relate." Late results do not bode well, having trouble getting the auditors to sign them off? Should have been out at 7am no excuses, amateur hour continues.

Still 85% whether its labelled free cashflow or distributable cashflow. DYOR

Not quite true its 85% cannot expect Gaia to run the plant for nothing.

Care to expand on the funded and strong? What is the current cash balance? GCW was a terrible deal said that at the time and it is even more true now the oil price has recovered. Believing what RC says is not healthy. I have immense scepticism on his ability to deliver based entirely on his performance to date. For an example I contacted him regarding the ADL deal, he replied that it was looking good. When asked how a licence that expires in early 2017 and required tens of millions of investment before any return is looking good got no reply. Good at sound bites, facts are lacking though.

Is this very good news the same as the blockbuster news from RC you were promoting early April just before the last placement. Are you being manipulated to ramp before a placement again?

So are you alluding that Heriberto Gonzalez has an undisclosed position in NCT, yet it is impossible for RC to have a similar undisclosed position in SCDI. All very cosy and distinctly lacking in transparency, especially as you are alluding that a NCT employee has benefited from the transfer of a stake in lm20 from NCT to his private company.

A joint venture will still require some capital investment if not then the stake is likely to be so small that it will have little impact. Unfortunately point 1 revenue generation is insufficient to fund point 2 or point 3. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised and they will receive a decent stake with a small outlay, but not holding my breath.

There has been no accusations of unlawful practice, this is something that is once again a blatant lie manufactured by yourself. Questions have to be asked about the integrity of someone who repeatedly produces false claims. Still not one single explanation as to why the operatorship was handed from NCT to SCDI despite the alleged deep understanding of the regulars. Still unable to grasp the concept of ownership differing from operatorship, I would suggest that investing in oil companies is not advisable for someone unable to understand this very simple concept. Investors should be unsettled by the move into Mexico because every previous change in direction has led to the issuing of billions of new shares. Oilfield services are a very capital frontloaded sector, the machines required are expensive. How are NCT going to fund their share of this?

First Oklahoma was main player. This became a sideshow as Shoats Creek became the company maker. Shoats Creek is now a sideshow and Mexico is now the big play. Spot a trend? I will remain sceptical until something is actually delivered as talk is cheap and history proves it is not followed through.

Its that the same as the forward looking statements included last year or they now history as well. Shoats Creek was a company maker now its Mexico arriba.

Delaying release to blunt the impact of the annual results which have to be released before the end of the month and will make pretty grim reading imho dyor

If you expect a reply to a question then it is probably best to be respectful to the person you are asking a question drillingcrew.

Oil service companies are among the first to be hit when the oil price turns down as costs are cut and they recover slower as companies are wary of increasing investment to early. It is just as volatile its all linked. High oil price leads to high drilling, well completions etc as companies invest. Low oil price leads to lower drilling etc as investment is cut back.

Someone that suggests oil volatility is avoided by oil service companies is badly researched. Why would oil investors be getting back in if the oil services were not affected as you initially alluded to. They would have stay in as the they would not be affected.

The service based sector is still affected by the oil price, they are the first to be squeezed as producers look to cut costs. Halliburton and Schlumberger falling profits are clear evidence of this. 50% fall in Schlumberger profits from this year to last is a big swing, Halliburton is running at a loss. Pemex have been cutting costs, first target will have been the oil services providers. Badly researched post.

Jackal5 I agree the RP alone should be worth more than the current market cap but the lack of details on the plant is holding people back. What are the running costs of the plant, what size is the expected business in the catchment area, what is the tax rate on revenue for the plant etc the details are vague as usual. The finances at NCT are always treated as a secret, disclosing the cash balance and the current rate of cash burn will allow investors to make informed decisions on the prospects of a further placing until then investors will be put of expecting the past to repeat itself. I have money available and would like to reduce my average but until I see progress I am prepared to wait even if that means a higher price.

The usually "lack of research" riposte with no substance other than vague promises of good things to come. He looks after himself nearly $500k in pay in the two years of published accounts suggests he is looking after himself quite well. Dilution after dilution does not need explaining, where is the badly lacking research in this statement? Looking forward to seeing your deep, intense research that disproves the statement as you have claimed that it is off the mark.