Member Info for LayLadyLay

neon - I didn't say that CERP shouldn't include a cautionary statement on their presentations. It's standard practise to do so. I'm simply highlighting the fact that CERP presentations are speculative and you should exercise your judgment as to how much you rely on the information provided.

Forward looking statements are not fact but some rampers keep referring to the presentations as if they are fact.

I don't think there's much we really know about the success or failure of the Saffron well. CERP says they encountered hydrocarbons but I'm not aware of them stating how much net pay, if any, has been discovered at each of the targets other than a general belief that the secondary target may produce commercial quantities of oil. I look forward with eager anticipation to the results of testing and some facts and figures, including how much it has cost to drill this well.

The small print removes accountability.

Bamps - "Everything I've mentioned is in the presentation unless I've remarked in my opinion"

If you skip to the last page of the presentation you will see the following text which warns the reader that the information is speculative.

"Certain statements in this presentation are “forward looking statements” which are not based on historical facts but rather on the management’s expectations regarding the Company's future growth. These expectations include the results of operations, performance, future capital, other expenditures (amount, nature and sources of funding thereof), competitive advantages, planned exploration and development drilling activity including the results of such drilling activity, business prospects and opportunities. Such statements reflect management's current beliefs and assumptions and are based on information currently available.

Forward looking statements involve significant known risks, unknown risks and uncertainties. A number of factors could cause the actual results to differ materially from the results denoted in these statements, including risks associated with vulnerability to general economic market and business conditions, competition, environmental and other regulatory changes, the results of exploration, development drilling and related activities, actions by governmental authorities, the availability of capital markets, reliance on key personnel, uninsured and underinsured losses and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company.

Although these statements are based upon what management believes to be reasonable assumptions, the Company cannot assure investors that the actual results will be consistent with these forward looking statements."

There is a reason that LK prefers to make presentations rather than RNS which must be fact based.

RNS Number : 8288C
Columbus Energy Resources PLC
13 February 2020

Leo Koot, Executive Chairman of Columbus, commented:

"The Company is currently testing the Saffron well in Trinidad and will update the market as the testing progresses. "

Update the market = RNS not sales presentation.

So far there has been no official update on progress of testing.

"no one knows how many shares I have and when I trade which is very frustrating for trolls like 12bn and Krapp over on LSE"

Can anyone guess who said this today? Although he doesn't reveal the extent of his shareholding, assuming he is invested, he freely admits to being a trader. Now who would have thought? :)

MrMagoo31 reminds me of the poster formally known as Bulwinkle

"Contractor Shares

The Company continues to employ the Contractor Shares scheme to settle fees otherwise due to various contractors. The Company aims to utilise the Contractor Shares Scheme in a prudent manner, balancing cash management with equity dilution.

The relevant services have now been provided and therefore the Company will issue 9,500,000 new ordinary shares to those contractors (the "New Contractor Shares"), representing 1.1% of the 848,260,742 ordinary shares in issue prior to the issuance of the New Contractor Shares.

The New Contractor Shares will rank pari passu in all respects with the Company's existing ordinary shares. An application will be made for the New Contractor Shares to be admitted to trading on AIM, ("Admission"), and it is expected that Admission will become effective and that dealings will commence on or around 19 February 2020."

I don't believe for one moment that contractors want to invest in CERP and be 'aligned with shareholders', they simply want to be paid for their work.

So how does CERP persuade contractors to be paid in shares rather than cash? I presume that CERP calculates the number of shares to be allocated to contractors at a discount to the prevailing SP otherwise contractors will lose out if the SP should fall while they are still in the process of selling on the open market. There has to be an incentive for contractors to be paid in shares otherwise why would they take the risk of accepting payment via this method? There must be some kind of assurance that they will not lose out by accepting payment this way. I can't see contractors agreeing to this method of payment unless they are guaranteed not to receive less than they would get if they were paid in cash. The only mechanism I can envisage to achieve this would be to calculate the number of shares to be issued to each contractor on a favourable, discounted basis. Maybe there are other guarantees in place such that if the SP falls below a certain level that additional shares will be issued at a later date to cover any loss/shortfall in the amounts received? We don't know what has been agreed with contractors but you can be certain that contractors want to be paid for their work and talk of being aligned with shareholders is IMHO just a way of selling this to shareholders who are diluted each time another block of shares is issued to cover costs. I doubt contractors want anything more than being paid 'at least' what they would recieve in cash.

So what is the incentive that persuades contractors to take shares in lieu of cash? And don't anyone please say it's because contractors know what's going on and want to share in the benefit of any upcoming good news. If that were the case why would they start selling as soon as possible? It has already started.

It seems that in4cedros confuses disagreeing on points raised by other posters as being attacks on the poster when it's nothing more than an alternative viewpoint. This board serves no useful purpose if debate is only focused on ramping the sp mindlessly although I can see why some attempt to do just that.

I stand accused by in4cedros of not believing that PRD will ever take up the option to purchase the Innis -Trinity field from CERP for a minimum consideration of US$4.2m. This carrot has been waved around at CERP investors for as long as I can remember and the expiry of the option has been extended time and time again. My view is that it will never happen but no doubt the option will remain and be extended yet again as it sounds plausible if somewhat unlikely in my opinion. Sadly, some rampers quote this sum as if it is inevitable, no doubt in order to tempt new investors into believing that the company will suddenly become cash rich and able to fund it's operations without regularly having to raise new funds.

I remember when CERP was LGO and in4cedros went to extreme lengths to promote the BNP oil swap deal negotiated by Neil Ritson. I couldn't see how this was affordable and history proved me right. We now have another point of disagreement and it's nothing to do with discrediting Bamps or any other poster. It's about having a different perspective on the likelihood of something positive occurring, or not. Unfortunately it seems that in4cedros doesn't like contrary views to his own. He clearly can't get no satisfaction:

"But, he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke
The same cigarettes as me "

in4cedros can't get no satisfaction

It seems that in4cedros confuses disagreeing

US$3.1m in cash (including US$0.62m in restricted cash) (as at 31 January 2020)

Now you can see why LK made two drawdowns in quick succession from the Lind loan facility. Without the loan facility the cash position would be only US$100k.

Excluding restricted cash the cash position is US$2.48m

The company could lose the Goudron IPSC if they are unable to agree on a new extension beyond end March 2020. There will be minimum work obligations included in any new agreement and I'm not sure CERP will want, or be able, to commit to potential spending given the dire need for fresh cash (IMHO) as well testing at Saffron will surely eat into current reserves and Lind may not allow the third and final drawdown to be made as it's their call on that.

How long will the cash last?

It feels like Leo has bet the farm on Saffron.

Cheeser - "You have me down as some sort of stooge Irene.............! lol"

She has you sussed Cheeser. I think she sees you as a cheesy whopper, some kind of CERP anti hero, battling imagined manipulation from your bedroom. How are the market makers treating you today? ;)

This was always a pump and dump IMHO. Take care for when the herd depart as the sp could retreat substantially in a very short time.

BOIL has some good future prospects but needs cash and has 1.9 billion shares in issue. I see a stock consolidation to be a possibility ahead of any fund raise.

This is a long term play so the current sp is unsustainable in my opinion.

I expect a fund raise along with any so called positive spin.

Bamps - "Will they open the taps on Goudron field?"

I haven't heard that line since 2014. There are very good reasons why they can't do that even if they wanted to.

"With crude oil price now at $50.07 and possibly getting lower, the spt tax will not be applicable to Cerp."

Oil price is currently $50.19 and SPT is still payable at prices above $50.

"This could be a positive time for Goudron."

Seeing lower oil prices as a benefit to CERP is akin to asking for your employer to pay you less so you don't pay as much income tax.

I suspect you want out of CERP and are ramping just a little bit ;)

There are good reasons why the market is shunning CERP, some of them historical (LGO), and some related to recent activities and lack of definitive information to shareholders.

CERP recently drew down two tranches of it's Lind loan facility, ostensibly to enable the company to accelerate any successful find at Saffron. Some would argue that they took two tranches close together because a poor result at Saffron might take the MC below the threshold required to enable the second tranche to be drawn upon. This is the view I take and the market seems to be on the same page.

There is little to suggest that Saffron will be a producer after flow tests have been conducted. The company says it has encountered multiple shows of hydrocarbons but that logging has proved inconclusive, hence the need to flow test to ascertain whether the well has commercial possibilities or not.

The drill took a lot longer than was predicted and some say this is CERP taking a steady, cautious approach. Drilling costs money by the day and while there may be a case for taking a cautious approach, one could argue that time is money that CERP can ill afford to burn away so perhaps the main reason for the extended drill time is more likely to be unexpected problems encountered. Whatever is the reason for the protracted drill time one thing is certain, IMHO, the drill costs will be higher, possibly significantly higher, than budget.

When the company was renamed CERP it was an attempt to reinvent the company and shake off the legacy of LGO which had a history of failure. However, shareholders of LGO, still locked into CERP as they were before the name change, have long memories and are not easily persuaded to pump more into the company until they see conclusive proof of promises being fulfilled.

VSA is the company broker which regularly pushes an agenda to hype the future value of the company. It's what they are paid to do so no complaints that they are doing their best to portray the company prospects in a good light and generate some investor enthusiasm. The only investors likely to be drawn into investing are those who are new to the company and not those still locked in long term holders from the LGO days. That's my opinion anyway.

When the company reinvented itself it moved away from regular reporting to investors and said it would report quarterly, which they said is the industry norm. Latterly the quarterly reports have vanished and this does not bode well in the eyes of investors. If the company is shy of giving investors a clear picture of the health of the company then it is no surprise when investors take a negative view and sit on the sidelines waiting for news that will shed light on important matters such as production and finances.

In conclusion, the company has some work to do to regain the confidence of investors, particularly if there is likely to be a fund raise in the near future. Saffron needs to be a success but the signs are less than con

I think that all these buys are feeding a big sell order.

"Predator benefits from a Well Participation Agreement with FRAM Exploration Trinidad Ltd ("FRAM"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Columbus, whereby Predator will help plan and fund the Pilot CO2 EOR in return for 100% recovery of its project costs from Pilot CO2 EOR profits from oil sales, and thereafter 50% of all profits attributable to the Pilot CO2 EOR. "

How much will the project costs run to and how long will it take for PRD recovery of costs from Pilot CO2 EOR profits?

Presumably FRAM will be receiving nil benefit from Pilot CO2 EOR profits until PRD has recovered 100% of it's costs.

However, during that period FRAM will be operating free of charge to PRD but incurring operating costs of their own and not sharing any of the Pilot CO2 EOR profits. That's how it seems to me unless anyone has a different reality to share?

It all sounds a bit open ended. Even if costs can be accurately forecast, which seems somewhat doubtful at this early stage, there is no way to accurately forecast what profits are likely to be achieved other than by guesswork.

The word 'success' crops up several times in this appraisal but the only success has been to inject some CO2 and it will be a while before it is known if this will have the desire impact and increase production.

CERP stopped quarterly reporting some time ago and now the RNS are becoming vaguer and vaguer, lacking in detail, leaving people to speculate on the true position.

IMHO it sounds like Saffron is likely to be a dud and will be sold to investors as a valuable learning experience that tells us much about the SWP prospectivity. Blah, blah, blah!

In the meantime I suspect that the BoD are playing for time while they try to find a way forward that investors will buy into. I don't see how long they can survive without a cash injection of some sorts.

There will always be some on here who will try to create something positive out of what is fast becoming a cause for real concern.

Could the history of LGO be about to repeat itself?

On 4th September CERP announced Interim Results for 6 month period ending 30 June 2019

Pre-tax group loss for period of £1,721,000

Cash in hand of £1,053,000 at 30 June 2019

Since then CERP has drawn down a total of US$3m (£2.25m) from it's loan facility with Lind

We don't know the cash burn relating to the Saffron well drill so there's no point in speculating on precisely what may be left in the coffers but I would suggest very little and look forward to full year numbers being announced in due course. Will the company announce another pre tax loss similar to that incurred in H1/19 ?

On 13th September the company announced that all management fees would be paid in cash, previously 50% cash and 50% shares. This in itself puts further strain on cash resources.

Some of you confuse operational profits and positive operational cash flow as suggesting that the company is able to exist without any cash influx, be that by way of loans or placings.

We don't know the current cash position or the final cost of Saffron. Equally we don't yet know if Saffron is commercial.

Interesting times ahead and it would not surprise me to see the company seeking to raise cash in the very near future simply to stay afloat. If Saffron is not commercial or only marginally commercial then I can see a drag on future plans. All IMHO.