Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
I can’t speak for him, but if I was GRH, I’d say that we’re all big boys and girls and if you’re swayed into buying or selling by anyone else, then you deserve everything you get. As many have noted on this board including GRH, you make money in this game by the courage of YOUR conviction, no one else’s.
Had to break my hiatus to applaud such a wonderful song suggestion Wraith, and also to cast my vote…
GRH, really value you contributions and I hope you stick about. If not I’ll be seeking you out. Unsure if you use LinkedIn in much but you should have a connection request from me on there. The clue would be ‘SBM’.
Fairly sure the coming weeks will bring some pleasant surprises…
Hello MEM, good on you, I am going to follow as in recent days I’ve found myself spending far too much time on here. Some closing thoughts from me:
- I think we have a peerless team at the helm. Imagine if the first RNS had come out and said ‘pleased’ and ‘commercial’, followed by COO appointment, and then it transpired they were taking SDX volumes. The same characters that are bleating about ‘trickery’ and ‘lies’ would have been happy in the short term and then massively let down. Incidentally a lot of these people are LTH who have previously lauded PG’s measured and calm management approach. A lot of folks showing very little faith, obviously frustrated with the big paper loss (which I can relate to). I still think we will receive news we don’t expect on the commerciality of MOU-1, but PRD obviously won’t prioritise the production element of it in the context of their plan.
- Anyone who has followed the PRD story will know that if the drill was a failure then the releases by PG would be extremely out of character. He is a smart operator and I consider it a very positive sign that there hasn’t been any update on T&T simultaneous with the drill updates, nor any sign of crowd pleasing. Something bigger is at play, and PG is content for the short term turmoil to play out as a sideshow, knowing what is to come.
- The Churchill quote, with the omission of failure element, has deeper meaning. What that is I don’t know but it’s very deliberate and again PG hasn’t thrown it in for nothing.
I think there is some blockbuster action to be had in the near future. Good luck to all genuine holders, try to keep the faith, and I’m prepared to look like a right t*t if the negativity is proven right.
Excelsior, agree everyone has a right to their position, positive or negative. Trouble with this BB is only that the negativity is rarely backed up with anything intelligent. The negatives fall into two camps at the min, purely emotional/frustration venting with no value add, or obviously disruptive/malicious to various ends.
The first I understand and sympathise with to a degree, but consider the fundamentals not the feelings. If too much change on the fundamentals for you then sell down.
You reference apportioning of blame in your post. I feel very strongly that anyone who blames anyone else for their own investment choices to any degree simply shouldn’t be investing…
CLT, do you think PRD were in any better position evaluation wise to release definitive results of well evaluation today, when compared to Friday last week?
I might be wrong, but for me the RNS today was not ‘the RNS’ to define MOU-1 commerciality or otherwise. To my mind it was used as far as possible to try to alleviate SH concerns, but with all the same limitations as the initial update RNS in terms of final analysis and results.
Lonny must see something compelling to make the jump. I am sure there would have been an escape clause in the arrangement for both parties.
We don’t have the full picture yet which is incredibly frustrating, but there is more to this tale than a few missing words, which is still the only ammo the derampers seem have…
A few musings here:
- heavyweight board appointment. Clearly Morocco is a focus but if I understand it correctly then Mr Baumgartner will be COO across the business. He brings excellent experience in larger organisations which is not limited only influencing Morocco.
- I have no doubt that drill evaluation is still happening. My personal feeling is that MOU-1 could support a pilot programme or similar as outlined previously. As per GRH’s prior (excellent) post on E&D, why would PRD bother with the capex of a production development if the mother load and keys to a farm in/sell off are believed to be there in waiting?
- At this share price, Trin alone will cover it in the near future. For me it’s no brainer to pick up more at this level,
TT-T, you’ve hit the nail on the head and thanks for articulating it so well. Like you, I acknowledge the value in any post or opinion which is substantiated with facts or at least explained as an interpretation against the known facts. Wacky’s post is also spot on - I was thinking about it the other way round, to understand if any of those who are negative about the drill update RNS could offer information that focused on the ppm numbers given, even better if it includes some industry examples as reference points, including some unsuccessful comparisons.
So far all those slamming this stock seem to cite is a lack of hyperbole from PRD in the RNS, whereas a few of those who are in the ‘keep calm and carry on camp’ have managed to highlight that the drill would appear to fulfil most, if not all, of it’s stated predrill objectives. These were laid out in various other RNS months before the drilling activity.
Hello Spawny, I can assure you the only similarity I’m aware of between Sefton and myself is the fact we’re invested in PRD. The guy came out and said he didn’t like engineers. I am an engineer… you are right, a company will shout it from the rooftops, but surely only when the full and factual details of all analysis is known and understood. Surely otherwise that breaches various rules of RNS… as I say, maybe I’m a fool but I wouldn’t be surprised to see something in the next fortnight which totally changed the sentiment.
Hello Jonny, you make quite a simple statement ‘the well did not go as planned’. Can you substantiate that a bit more based on the information currently publicly available? I set aside some time tonight to revisit the SLR CPR, the annual report, and some old RNS.
There’s obviously two camps here, and one will be proved right in the near future. I still have a strong belief that there is much more to the MOU-1 update RNS.
In my view it’s impossible for PRD to RNS/interview to ease investor sentiment whilst the analysis referenced in the update is being carried out. Also, if you were PG, the single largest shareholder, and you know what you’ve got/what you’re sitting on, why would you give two hoots about any drop in share price for the limited period of time it takes to release news the market understands and likes? It would just be background noise whilst you get on with the solidification of value.
Maybe I’ve read the situation totally incorrectly, but I firmly believe PG would have handled news he perceived to be bad in a different way. MEM previously mentioned the possibility of the release of other company news to soften the blow of bad drill. We’ve seen nothing on T&T and Ireland but again I perceive that to be a good thing in the context of the drill update RNS.
Whether or not I end up looking like a fool for the strong belief, average microcap oilers, as PRD keep being referred to, dont sign NDA’s and develop projects with companies like Hoegh LNG. PG isn’t messing around and it would be totally out of character to release such a tone deaf RNS (from a basic PI perspective). Let’s see what the next few weeks bring…
Hello Nigel. I appreciate there are various circumstances but are any of them positive? Can you share your thinking? Do you think PG has released an RNS that he thought would be well received and understood but had the opposite reaction in the market?
Hi Kasjnaton,
Im a glass half full personality and I’d like to think some of your rationale is correct. What is your take in relation to the following though:
“ Furthermore it is also possible that PG cannot release any more information as although he may have some strong indicators that it is commercial, he does not have the required evidence to release such information within an RNS until the detailed interpreation of the wireline logs.”
Didn’t tighthole status mean that PG wasn’t obliged to make any comment until the wireline logs were evaluated? In which case why did they release this recent RNS at all? Surely if there was a strong suspicion of it being commercial but verification needed then better to hold off a few days and then release the ‘big one’ we were all hoping for?
Hi BDT, that was my post and the furry family was aimed at you and GRH :). This BB is probably well swerved for a few days whilst those with broken fun compasses do their thing… I was a mean winger back in the day, now I have to meander around at inside centre marshalling the younger whippets!
Hello Nigel, my comment should not be misconstrued as profligacy. Far from it. I am invested only to my comfortable limit which allows me to take a view on a paper profit erosion. I believe share price will eventually be back to where it was this morning and I am still well up on initial investment. My statement was just intended to remind folk who might be in a bit deeper that all is not lost, irrespective of SP recovery (in some ways).
Question for sensible contributors. There was talk of rig availability for PRD fitting in 2 wells before return to SDX. The language in the RNS seems to indicate the next drill is quite some way off ‘later in the year’. Is anyone still of the mind they’re doing any more drilling imminently?
Just a thought for all the LTH and contributors here whose input I’ve enjoyed and respected in the run up to the drill. That includes those who were very positive prior to drill, and those who bought balanced risk view.
This is just another day in life’s rich tapestry. Assuming the reason we all invest is to make money, then it’s never nice to see paper losses (or for most of us paper profits eroded). We all have choices to make - I hadn’t derisked as my personal choice with only a modest 6 figure holding was that the upside was worth more to me than the outcome in the event of a disappointment. Today has been a disappointment for many reasons, although one I don’t pretend to fully understand yet. I remain holding all as I believe in the direction and directors of PRD, who I still believe to be a class apart from companies in the sector with comparable market cap.
Above all else, it’s only money. I hope each and every one of the LTH who will be feeling it in the wallet finds some solace somewhere else today. Friends, family (including furry family), football… for me I’m just thankful my joints will still allow me to go down to my local rugby club this eve and toil through the first pre-season training.
All the best to all, who knows where this turns next, all I know is that I’m in.
Cheers Wacky, you’ve learned me something there I didn’t think there was any gas powered floating power gen installed to date. The company I work for have been looking very closely at ship-shape solution for it. I guess the secondary question I would have specific for the Irish plan is how the generated power gets into the electrical grid and what modifications that would require onshore? But anyway, very interesting concepts - thanks for the linking of them.
Hi Wacky, great article, thanks for posting. Just picking up on your gas to wire/offshore power gen comment, do you believe that is part of current plan? Doesn’t the development proposal utilise the existing gas receiving terminal at Inch, onward to existing onshore power gen? Hoegh don’t have any vessel in fleet capable of gas to wire, and to my knowledge such vessels are still only on drawing boards. I’m interested as maybe I missed something and I do really rate the gas to wire concept in this application context.