Member Info for LONGWAIT

CAPEX and OPEX cuts by nearly every oil and gas company on earth, forced by plummeting revenues, low demand, and brimming oil storage tanks, are the first step in what will likely become a roaring rebound in oil prices.
The main support for oil prices in the coming 12-18 months will likely come from the lack of investment in replacing maturing oil fields. Even in a doomsday scenario, in which demand in a post-coronavirus world could be lagging 10-15 million bpd behind 2019 levels until the end of 2020 or 2021, we will need more production to come onstream again. The financial destruction of US shale, North Sea oil and Canada, combined with a growing lack of investments in low-cost producing areas, will set the market up for a new perfect storm, this time resulting in a possible oil price shock to the upside.
The shale bust may grab plenty of the media headlines, but most oil supply will continue to come from the larger fields. The combination of production destruction in non-OPEC oil and the natural oil field production decline rate is a toxic one. If the market does not recognize this and continues to underinvest, oil prices will shoot up much faster than most analysts expect. 2021 could be a very bullish year for oil. Investment reductions, lay-offs, and total shut-ins are major roadblocks for a speedy and functional supply recovery worldwide. A decade of investment deficits could be doing the rest.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/A-Major-Bull-Run-Is-Forming-In-Oil-Markets.html

Correction: without my last purchase, my loss would have been 80 percent, but it's now 76 percent (not 91 percent).

I invested only a modest amount, AJED, because I had already invested far too much at inflated prices.

I thought they were too cheap when I invested heavily in 2014 at 140p, but got out belatedly at about 80p.

Back in at about 10p, I remember averaging up at 13p because I thought I didn't have enough!
I remember buying some at 7.5p on the way up to 18p, and finally at 8p and 9p when it was a 'certainty' that Barryroe would be developed with the help of APEC.
Every time, I thought they were cheap, but now every purchase except my last one is showing a loss, and the last one is only breaking even.

I now own nearly 15 times as many PVR shares as I had the first time around, and my loss is far greater - 91 percent against 43 percent.
Investing in AIM really is a mug's game, in which genuine investors pay for directors' salaries and bonuses and shorters' profits.

I would, however, like to believe that under AL, PVR is a different company with a different future.
I think it might be wiser to wait for confirmation of a farmout deal before investing any more, even if the price is higher.

I've just realised that your reference to Tuesday is to the EGM to approve the recent fundraising.
I would have thought it's a formality.
Do you really think that would give the share price much of a lift?

If you look at EOG's SP graph, after peaking at nearly 40p just over nine years ago, it appears to have entered a death spiral or a period of terminal decline, with progressively lower peaks and lows, recently reaching an all-time-low of 0.6p.

It's as if the increased production never happened.

I would imagine most people look no further than the price graph.
It may be that without an announcement of a farmout, the price will never take off again, and investors nowadays are so sceptical that they might wait until the farmout actually results in commercially producible oil being discovered before climbing on board.

The other possibility is a soaring oil price in a few years' time, coinciding with increased production, spending the price back up to 7.5p, as it was in July 2017.

Your point, Kenni, being that it's far safer for people's health to travel by car than public transport?

That is an interesting point.

It reminds me of something I read many weeks ago that the restrictions on air travel could actually result in more oil being used.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhorton1/2020/05/02/united-airlines-goes-big-in-china-hoping-to-resume-four-flights-in-june-to-beijing-chengdu-and-shanghai/#3e0053c842d5

https://simpleflying.com/chinese-air-travel-surge/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/air-canada-predicts-flying-again-christmas-worldwide-1.5551402

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/lockdown-3-0-dgca-extends-domestic-international-passenger-flight-suspension-till-may-17/articleshow/75503830.cms

I agree with the last two comments about GS.
I've said many times that they are in the habit of changing their forecasts in an attempt to catch up with events.
Now, they are predicting short-term pain and long-term joy, which is a very safe prediction to make in a bear market.

'And anyone who wants to live in that place is almost by definition mad, anyway.'

Couldn't agree more, when you compare crime rates there with those of continental Europe.

If the more optimistic expectations - such as OPEC's - for oil prices are met, PMO shouldn't have any problems surviving.

I reckon Brent would have to average just above $22 for the rest of this year to produce an overall average of $30, IANAA.

Well, Double, I knew before you posted that you wouldn't appreciate my taking the trouble to question robone's figures, but at least he has now stopped talking about Brent at $10.

You say you don't care whether Brent is at $20 or $60 and that the important thing is that HUR can keep going, but it surely would be much better if HUR were in the black than in the red, and that depends on the oil price.
According to my estimates below, an average for the rest of the year of $30 would result in an average for 2020 of $35.
That would leave HUR comfortably in the black.
There, and I managed to say all that without mentioning that poster.

In my opinion, Brent is more likely to trade in the range $20-40 for the rest of this year than the $10-30 predicted by an unmentionable poster.

The average is about $44.70, based on weekly prices as recorded in

https://www.statista.com/statistics/326017/weekly-crude-oil-prices/

If Brent averaged $30 for the rest of this year, the overall average would be $35.

'will stack in range of $10-$30 for long time.....'
', it will stay in avarange of $30 for a rest of the year'
' will be average of $30 by the end of this year'

You aren't mentioning $10 any more, robone.

I know the epidemic isn't over yet, but fewer than a quarter of a million have died, compared with about 30 million from Spanish Influenza, at a time when the world population was 1.8 billion compared with 7.8 billion now.

The recovery percentage rates include: Thailand 92, Australia 85, New Zealand 85, Austria 84, South Korea 84, Germany 80, Switzerland 80, Denmark 73, Malaysia 70 and Spain 60.

I don't see any comparison.

I can never get those articles to load, but regular readers must know my views on GS's views on the oil price.

The latest I read is that they are predicting further pain - something along the lines of the latest rally being a false dawn - that it will take four to eight weeks for supplies to 'balance ' and that, eventually, prices will rise strongly.

Something to please everyone - shorter and longer alike.

I still can't make sense of robone's predictions for the oil price: averaging $10-30 and averaging $30 .

I don't agree with MM about OGA being so supportive - precisely because of what has happened with LC.

I stand by my statement that CV is in retreat: the 'lockdowns' are being gradually lifted in Austria, Germany, Spain, Italy, Israel, and Thailand.
South Korea will not be lifting a lockdown because it hasn't had one!
It is quite clear that the wild differences in infection rates and deaths by country are largely the results of big differences in the way governments have handled the epidemic.

I see, Longknife, that we are both long both in name and position.

Let's hope that when the bid finally comes, the wait will finally prove to have been worth it.

The Grammar Police have just notified me that I may have mistakenly taken your 'in avarange of $30 ' to mean 'an average of $30,' when you may have meant 'a range of $30.'

There is, however, no such thing as a range of a single figure.

By all means, robone; I am all in favour of giving credit where it is due.
But what is your prediction?
Is it the one you made at 15:33:

'... so lets stick to the fact Poo won't go anywhere in the near future, will stack in range of $10-$30 for long time..... purely traders paradise.'

or is it the one you made at 19:36:

'... it will stay in avarange of $30 for a rest of the year, obviously there will be some ups and downs..... '

Ups and downs in the range of 10-30 cannot produce an average of 30.

An average of 30 means that 30 will be breached.
I said I would remind you if that happened, but now you've changed your prediction and are predicting that 30 will be breached!

Why waste time posting comments on this 'dog of a share' when there are much better options to comment on, ranger4?

The price rose from about 5p to 28p about three years ago and in the course of nearly three years gave up all its gains.
Just goes to show what a mug a long-term investor like me is.
It was possible to have made something like a 500 percent profit in the course of three months in 2017, instead of wasting three years accumulating shares at 'bargain' prices.

Thank you for pointing out the Grammar Police's oversight, robone.
I shall ask them to correct their omission.
As for your prediction that oil will not breach $30 for a long time, I'll remind you of it if the price does breach it during the next 12 months.