Member Info for LONGWAIT

GRAMMAR POLICE ADJUDICATION:

Wellwell's objection is dismissed.

The comma after 'LONGWAIT,' however, is actually incorrect, as it splices two clauses together.
The Grammar Police is aware that this malpractice has become almost ubiquitous and refrains from cautioning offenders for this minor offence as there are far more serious crimes against grammar to which we need to attend.

Yesterday, we had to deal with a particularly serious case of multiple split infinitives.

The offender was, of course, of American nationality.

You're welcome, Tinlode, but I wasn't intending to offer any remuneration as it's difficult to keep accounts while in the freezer.

Wellwell is obviously jealous.

I shall be dealing with his objection to your appointment shortly.

'they are correct in the share placement as a revenue guarantee in case the HSBC fiasco continues on for months. '

I disagree.

They cannot wait months because then they would have to raise money again.

If the money hasn't arrived by Monday, then it's over with APEC and PVR must enter serious talks with the interested parties who, according to TOR, exist.

It is possible, however, that the terms of the deal might not please shareholders.

You mean, Trellis, we're going to have to spend the rest of our lives in the navy?

'Why would he buy in here now?'

As I said the other day, he must have a good idea of the interest on the part of certain majors in farming in and taking APEC's place.

It's difficult to believe it's a pure gamble.

'HUR are potentially undervalued'

The word potentially is superfluous.

Message to tinlode from Grammar Police: you're hired!

Now I'm confused, JK.
I would be more than willing to share my Mammoth steak with you, but my present understanding is that they are no longer available.
I am reliably informed that they were taken off the market in about 2,000 BC.

By 'mammoth breakfast,' I was referring to the size of breakfast required after such a long chill-in, and also the energy required to read the long back-log of posts about HUR's share price being 'what it is,' 'in the 40s for a reason,' and the endless speculation about every drill being a failure, a return to 30s, oil drying up, oil becoming redundant, jumbo batteries powering cross-Atlantic ships and passenger planes, Aramco calling in the receivers, RT having to downgrade his office to a garden shed, and not forgetting the most terrible handicap of all: too many shares.

'what are we to do?'

What I did - invest in an 'intelligent' luxury freezer, get in, and set the timer to defreeze when the bid comes.

You can then read through three years or so of anguished, hair-tearing, posts from despairing posters, and chuckle all the way through your mammoth historic breakfast.

Then collect the cash.

I recall that the share price was 5p immediately before it took off.
Malcy predicted 50p if the moratorium were lifted.
It then fell from 19 to 13 and 28 to 19 and reached 25 by time the moratorium was lifted, since when it has declined to below 13 again.
If the price continues to decline to 5p, that would mean the market has decided that the moratorium didn't happen!

'This has to be well oversold!'

I believe it's at an all-time-low.

That implies that the company's prospects are the worst they have ever been!

In spite of wise heads saying that HUR wouldn't become a producer, I predicted correctly that it would - simply because in the absence of a bid, there would be no alternative.

Other wise heads would explain the languishing share price with such pearls as 'the share price is low for a reason,' 'the price is what it is,' etc., or 'X/Y/Z could go wrong,' but the reason could be that it has been manipulated, which is what I've been saying for a long time and many other posters are saying.

Judging by the reaction to the last successful drill (share price hardly moved), if this drill is successful, it is unlikely that the price will return to the 60s.
The rationalisation - and I wouldn't put it any more strongly than that - will be something along the lines of 'the failure at WD has cast a cloud over the company and put the validly of the whole model in doubt.

It could not be more obvious that the state and prospects of this company are being viewed by the market through the eyes of a depressive.

I imagine that if one day bid of 500p per share is made by a major, the share price will remain in the 40s and we will hear that the major's cheque could bounce, might never arrive (as has happened at PVR), the major could go bust (like Thomas Cook), the major could withdraw its offer because of new 'doubts' about Warwick Deep that put 'the validity of the whole model in doubt.'
And don't forget: there are too many shares.

'oh how the times have changed

Yes, Murray.
Notwithstanding your appalling spelling elsewhere, I agree with your general point.
I've said before that markets have changed dramatically.
There used to be great excitement about a growing company's prospects, but nowadays there is always gloom.
The LSE pages reflect that change.

I'm going to let you off, Murray, as I sense that your misspelling of 'grammar' was a deliberate provocation.

Adjudication by Merriam Webster

in the case of The Grammar Police (represented by LONGWAIT) v Wellwell

Minutiae, we’ve established, is the plural of minutia and also far more common in prose than the singular minutia. There is, however, confusion over the pronunciation of both the singular and the plural, and the confusion may be leading some to use the singular minutia where the plural minutiae is called for.

Verdict: LONGWAIT 1 Wellwell 0

From the Grammar Police to Wellwell:

This is a fixed penalty notice on account of your illegal use of 'minutia' instead of 'minutiae.'
You will be relieved to learn that, as it is a first offence, you are being issued with a caution.
We would, however, warn you that it's still 'Three strikes and you're out!'

It would seem that PP is confident that Barryroe will go ahead one way or another.

Remember that TOR said that majors had shown interest in taking APEC's place.

Plunkett must have been aware of the details when he bought these shares.

Unless I'm mistaken, the price is within 0.1 p of the all-time low.

'He added that APEC is strongly representing to the Irish oil exploration firm that the funds will be received by the new backstop date of September 30.'

How could APEC know that when even HSBC apparently haven't said so?