Grammatical howler of the day: 'I could probably buy Greenland instead of Donald Trump.'
NO-ONE could buy Donald Trump!
I'm interested in your Woodside investment story. I don't know what the exchange rate was, but it seems your investment increased in value by more than 100 times. I doubt whether many people here on LSE would allow a profit to run that far.
Either we will receive a reasonable offer or we won't. It's standard form on LSE for many posters to predict a negative outcome. If they are right, they will be crowing and we'll be told, 'You see, TW was right,' ' I told your so!' etc. If a reasonable offer is received, either they will all disappear and TW will never be mentioned again, or they will say that it's not a reasonable offer and it's derisory compared to four figures, etc.
I don't know which article is being referred to. The one I found online (only part of which I am permitted to read) contains the line: 'Today there was a final kick in the gonads for the mug punters suckered in by CEO James Parsons and others.' I don't consider that to be a serious comment, but rather the kind of conspiracy theory nonsense so often penned by angry posters.
I'm sick of hearing of backstops too. How can a backstop mean both a deadline and a border? I rank it with that other idiotic word, lockdown, and refuse to use either. PVR have extended their deadline, but in reality it isn't a deadline either, because real deadlines can't be extended. We still don't know why the payment has not cleared or whether it ever will.
You're definitely getting carried away, Beer belly, and beginning to sound like a ramper.
Remember, you're supposed to talk about all the things that could go wrong, e.g. all the oil drying up, or even if it does dry up, no one will want it any more, or even if they still want it, the price will go so low because of Trump that it won't be worth extracting it any more, and even if none of these things happen, the share price will collapse in a stock market crash.
I've had plenty of practice on SOU, where posters claim that the gas found and independently valued doesn't actually exist.
I'm sorry, Scarf, but you've lost me there. How many noses exactly has Parsons got? And ducks have noses of a kind, but they are actually beaks. If he is consulting the ducks, maybe he's going quackers.
100p per share would be a premium of 1150 percent, not 1400 percent. However, I don't think S/O was predicting an offer that high; he was giving his estimate of SOU's valuation. 50p per share would be a premium of 525 percent. Usually, a takeover results in a premium of less than 100 percent. Do you imagine that companies will tell Rothschild's: 'We can't offer more than 16p per share because it would look excessive'?