Member Info for LONGWAIT

Welcome back, Double!

As you can see, we are battling a Corona-type deramping virus.
May I - in the most discreet way possible - enquire as to your current renal status (bearing in mind that the share price dipped below 15p while you were away)?
I was also intending to enquire about another poster's virile status, but I can't remember his screen name.

'A significant holder must notify the issuer (JOG - which then informs the market via RNS) within 2 days as 1% thresholds are crossed.'

Well, RG hasn't!
He notified JOG when his holding decreased from 9.4 to 7.64 and then from 7.64 to 5.93 percent.
So far, he has been notifying JOG at intervals of about 1.7 percent.
In that case, we can expect another notification at about 4.2 percent, which means after the sale of about another 380,000 shares.

I have just realised: it took only three and a half weeks to get down from 7.64 to 5.93 percent (compared with about seven months to get down from 9.4 to 7.63 percent - the time period I cited previously).

Provided he has been selling at the same rate, he must be half way through getting to 4.2 percent, in which case we can expect an RNS around 27 February.

The price could indeed be about 80p by then!

Thanks, DU, for your considered opinion.
I really don't want to argue with you about directors' remuneration, as it's a scandal - or at least in the case of a company going down the plug hole, which happens often enough on AIM.

For what it's worth, I have as much confidence in the integrity of HUR's directors as I have in JOG's.

HUR is bringing in plenty of revenue - so has the advantage over JOG in that respect.
It isn't clear yet how JOG is going to progress, but when it is the punters will return.

Well, WWN, production appears to have been increased by 50 percent.

That's a fifty percent increase, not a fifty percent decrease!

No-one needs to look inside the data room to know that BP isn't buying barrels of water from HUR, WW.

As Double (hope he will reappear soon) has pointed out, however large the water cut may be, it hasn't affected the amount of actual oil HUR has been able to produce.

As for Corona, the scare will end - remember Avian influenza and Ebola? - and the oil price will bottom again and HUR will bottom again.

You are right: HUR will prove all the doubters and scare mongers wrong.

'I thought I knew where I was with HUR and now I'm scratching my head.'

No need to scratch your head about HUR; it's about AIM that one needs to scratch.

'As night follows day they will perform a volte face ...'

Watch James Ashcroft, who says that HUR's 'fate lies squarely in the hands of financiers and corporate rainmakers', James Hosie (of Barclays) who alleges, inter alia, that HUR is not 'a stable producer,' and a few others.

Don't be surprised if DSPP announces, like Private Frazer, that he 'never dooted' the management at HUR.

'just to think i was 40 odd not so long back ...'

(SAS)

I was forty odd not so long ago, SAS.
After this share slump, I've been feeling more like 80.
Let's hope we've just bounced off the bottom and that El hasn't drunk his last El vino.

Thanks for your reply, DU.

Of course, I do care what the market 'thinks,' as it affects me, but I was showing my frustration with it, especially in HUR's case, where its valuation of the company defies belief.
A poster on HUR from the financial services industry says that he has never seen a company more undervalued.
I fear there may have been a misunderstanding: when I had a go at 'know-all' posters: I certainly didn't mean you.
I had in mind the posters who appear, as if by magic, when a highly-regarded company's share has been savaged, make comments about its imminent demise, and obviously enjoy seeing the resulting displeasure of investors.

'The seller will soon have gone (or stopped selling if he has any sense at all).'

Anyone who has read the biographical account of Jesse Livermore's trading career will be familiar with his strategy of closing long positions on the way up, because then there were buyers willing to buy what he had to sell.
He knew that if he sold on the way down, his own selling would mean he would get lower and lower prices as he sold in tranches.
Something like the latter scenario has been happening with RG's attempt to liquidate or at least greatly reduce his long position. It seems that he sold more than usual after the rally that followed the director's purchase, but if the price falls much further, he may well ask himself whether it is worth selling any more.
I can't see him liquidating his position.

'Somehow or other this oil has been construed to be worth 20 cents a barrel.'

And somehow or other, the market, in its infinite wisdom, has HUR on a price-earnings ratio of one.

Someone here wrote a few weeks ago, when the JOG SP was rather higher, that the SP proved that the market didn't believe JOG would ever get the oil out of the ground.

Who cares what the market believes?
When RG started buying at 57p, the market didn't believe anyone would buy such large numbers of shares or that the SP would rise to 240p, or that, along the way, JOG would be awarded licences for 100 mmboe, and when market rated the shares at 240p, it didn't believe that the price would fall to 100p.

So, what does all that prove?
Only that the market can't ever make its mind up what it believes and that certain know-all posters select a point in time and declare that that tells you what they market thinks.

What's more, John, three other 'after-hours' buy transactions (including two one million share transactions) are priced at just under 16.5p.

I have suspected for some time that he generally sells in parcels of 10,000 shares, of which there are usually just a few in a day, but today there were six (plus a single 25,000 sell), so it looks as though he sold extra, following the rise.

I think he is down to his last million shares.

That's the kind of sarcastic remark that reminds me of why I stopped posting here previously.

When the share price was 64.5 p the day before production started, there was a severe shortage of condescending posters like you.

After eight months of production, totaling about 3.6 million barrels of oil,
and revenue of $200 million, there are masses of posters talking about HUR's imminent demise - and it's based not on reality, but on nothing more than the share price.

'Longwait Sadly you are out of touch with reality! The SP is reality'

The SP tells you the reality about the market; it doesn't tell you the reality about the true state of the company.

Edison have valued HUR at 110p per share (against a market price of 15.4 p) and the company is making $35 million per month.

That's the reality.

Well, S/O, my figures are based on those for the first eight months, increased by the 50 percent announced, but not yet confirmed, by the company.
I don't see any barriers, except those to investors being allowed to see reality for what it is.

'If people think HUR is cheap then BUY IT, moaning about it doesn’t make sense.'

We ARE buying it!
I myself bought some more today for 15.9p.
It's not we who have done most of the moaning.
Most of it has been done by HUR's critics, complaining about alleged management incompetence, alleged concealment of water cuts, an alleged drilling programme failure, alleged dividend abandonment - in short, complaining that everything about the company that we admire is, in fact, no good.
Do you know how many posts were published here about alleged water cuts allegedly destroying the company, with daily updates on TLF's latest musings on the subject?
Hundreds of posts, and if someone said it was all nonsense, he was accused of denying reality.

If all the nonsense we've read, from TLF, Jamie Ashcroft, who claims that HUR's 'fate lies squarely in the hands of financiers and corporate rainmakers', James Hosie - who alleges, inter alia, that HUR is not 'a stable producer,' were true, how could HUR be producing 20 kbopd and making about $35 million profit per month?

'two analysts have explained why they are now a “sell”.'

(DOD)

I don't know which two analysts you have in mind.

Ashcroft explained when the SP was 55p that a successful EPS would 'underpin' a SP of 55p.
At 22p, after eight months of a successful EPS, he says the shares are overvalued.

Sorry, DOD, but he has much explaining still to do.

'I have never experienced a share so undervalued for no obvious reason.'

I suppose that's why the reasons keep changing: FB doesn't work; massive water cuts being concealed; plan to issue dividend abandoned; model doesn't work; three-drill programme a 'failure'; Lincoln Crestal abandoned; company's future is in the hands of financiers; company can't compete.
Even as I've read today's posts, I've noticed new explanations for the price fall.

As for a bid of 15p, I would be surprised if major shareholders would accept a bid for the whole company of less than ten times that.

In five years' time, accumulated cash profits could amount to more than 100 p per share.
Why accept 15 p now, when you could get 100 p in five years' time?

'why no hostile take over at these levels ... ?'

Over on HUR, I've pointed out that its expected profits from oil sales for the next twelve months exceed its market capitalisation, and that the share price has fallen by 75 percent since it started producing oil. Yet there is no shortage of posters there saying that the shares are still too high and several recent articles (including the IC's) have been unfavourable.

HUR is at a discount of 86 percent to Edison's most-recent risked NAV.

At 1.7p, SOU was at a discount of 89 percent to a recent estimate of its NAV.

Looking at what has been written by many posters and journalists, many seem to be out-of-touch with reality.

Some have been telling me that I'm out-of-touch with reality.

PMO fell to 19p, before recovering to 146p (now 100p) but that was on fears that it would be unable to refinance its billions of dollars of debt.

With HUR, what's the fear?

Can you provide a link?

At
https://www.ukogplc.com/page.php?pID=5

the percentage holdings are even bigger.