Member Info for Love_You

350p-400p per share is reasonable equity value here in my opinion - global oil demand is strong/not falling, and global production is somewhat struggling apparently - and PMO have some great projects (projects with enough economies of scale/economic size) for 2020-2030, being SeaLion, Zama, Big-P and Tolumount.

However the equity valuation here is a joke. This company has more potential, yet already produces the same cashflows and has a similar enterprise value to Kaz Minerals, yet Kaz Minerals has an equity value (market capitalisation) of over five times as much as PMO. Makes no reasonable sense - just illogical financiers in my opinion - but these illogical equity valuations are holding companies back from raising capital at sensible prices in the markets and stunting/distorting the real economy (food in the shops, petrol prices, spending on resurfacing roads, job creation etc.)

Yes but American investors sold out at 330p in 2014 because they new the oil price was going to half (well my theory is that the American investment community gets forewarned about the oil price cycle by the FED/government/pentagon who are the only people who can realistically manipulate the global oil market to their own agenda).

However oil is now more needed/in demand by the global economy than in 2014 - and PMO is one of the few companies who have continued to behave rationally in terms of looking for new acreage, progressing projects (albeit slowly and with the clusterfuck that was Solan, but Chrysaor also seemed to offload their financial contributions to the Solan project at a great time for them and a terrible time for PMO, yet PMO seemingly allowed them to do so - and this does not "add up" to my mind if both companies were taking commercially self-interested decisions). Anyway the point is that in the medium term over the past five years the strategic direction of PMO has been correct at the level that the world economy couldn't switch away from oil-and-gas particularly quickly and hence new projects would be needed.

So, some might say those American investors who sold out at 330p per share in 2013/2014 were wrong over the medium term in terms of their predictions for the global economy's medium-term demand for oil - surely the only logical reason to sell down equity in the oil sector (because you believe that fundamental economic demand for the product is about to peal/or already over in that economic sector).

So with their predictions being in essence wrong, can the people who bought those PMO shares at 330p in 2013/2014 now see a profit on their investments please. For example a share price of between 350p-400p would be a good start given the current oil price of $75 when PMO issued several RNSs last year saying that PMO would be profitable at $50 and SeaLion would be profitable at anything over $35 and deliver a gross production output of 80,000 bopd (doubling PMO's total oil output), and contributing a billion barrels of new oil (gross) to maintain oil price stability across global markets.

In 2008 oil price was $140 and petrol/diesel prices were £1.30.

Today oil price is $70 and petrol/diesel prices are £1.30.

You can see the economic decline/depression that the politicians/BoE seems to think is "ethical" as they pander to the green lobby.

The point being that the low oil price prevents oil-and-gas companies from being able to economically justify investment in developing new oil-and-gas supplies (as many equity investors in that sector have seen 90%+ losses since 2014). .

Yet the high petrol/diesel price at the pumps forces a decline in economic activity across the economy.

Ergo, an economic decline has been happening since 2008 on a scale never seen before in human history (not their fault, but the global population is now at about the highest it has ever been - so economic mismanagement has a greater human cost than ever before in history).

In 2008 oil price was $140 and petrol/diesel prices were £1.30.

Today oil price is $70 and petrol/diesel prices are £1.30.

You can see the economic genocide that the politicians think is "ethical" as they pander to the green lobby.

The point being that the low oil price prevents oil-and-gas companies from being able to economically justify investment in developing new oil-and-gas supplies.

Yet the high petrol/diesel price at the pumps forces a decline in economic activity across the economy.

Ergo an economic decline has been happening since 2008/is happening on a scale never seen before in human history (not their fault, but the global population is now at about the highest it has ever been - so economic mismanagement has a greater human cost than ever before in history).

In 2008 oil price was $140 and petrol/diesel prices were £1.30.

Today oil price is $70 and petrol/diesel prices are £1.30.

You can see the economic genocide that the politicians think is "ethical" as they pander to the green lobby.

The point being that the low oil price prevents oil-and-gas companies from being able to economically justify investment in developing new oil-and-gas supplies.

Yet the high petrol/diesel price at the pumps forces a decline in economic activity across the economy.

The government must think people are stupid not to notice that they are orchestrating an economic decline on a scale never seen before in human history (not their fault, but the global population is now at about the highest it has ever been - so economic mismanagement has a greater human cost than ever before in history).

In 2008 oil price was $140 and petrol/diesel prices were £1.30.

Today oil price is $70 and petrol/diesel prices are £1.30.

You can see the economic genocide that the politicians think is "ethical" as they pander to the green lobby.

The point being that the low oil price prevents oil-and-gas companies from being able to economically justify investment in developing new oil-and-gas supplies.

Yet the high petrol/diesel price at the pumps forces a decline in economic activity across the economy.

The government must think people are fools not to notice that they are orchestrating an economic decline on a scale never seen before in human history (not their fault, but the global population is now at about the highest it has ever been - so economic mismanagement has a greater human cost than ever before in history).

In 2008 oil price was $140 and petrol/diesel prices were £1.30.

Today oil price is $70 and petrol/diesel prices are £1.30.

You can see the economic genocide that the politicians think is "ethical" as they pander to the green lobby.

The point being that the low oil price prevents oil-and-gas companies from being able to economically justify investment in developing new oil-and-gas supplies.

Yet the high petrol/diesel price at the pumps forces a decline in economic activity across the economy.

The government must think people are fools not to notice that they are orchestrating an economic genocide on a scale never seen before in human history (not their fault, but the global population is now at about the highest it has ever been - so economic mismanagement has a greater human cost than ever before in history).

These people blocking Barryoe are fools …or they don't care about being responsible for the biggest economic collapse in history with all the misery that would entail being inflicted on the global population - Ireland's oil and gas is also needed by fruit and veg farmers in Kenya who are growing the food you are probably eating this week - if you look at the labels have you noticed how much of the food in the supermarkets actually comes from abroad?

Oil and gas is need to grow this food and then to fly/ship it to Ireland and then to distribute it to the supermarkets, and for the civilians to drive to the supermarkets to buy it.

Only a fool would think leaving the Barryoe oil in the ground is an ethical thing to do - but given Providence have had seven years of doing nothing, all the time the directors collecting salaries of hundreds of thousands of euros and benefits and pension contributions and free shares/share option - is a new company needed which can actually deliver the rigs/manpower to produce the oil?

I have zero faith in Providence based on past behaviour - why did they give half of this project away to the Chinese. If I was running PVR I would have used the past seven years to train up Irish graduates/personnel and bought a few rigs from the secondary market in offshore drilling - in which prices are at historical lows for perfectly serviceable, but older rigs, due to the lack of drilling for the past five years due to the low oil price (yet high petrol/diesel prices at the pumps - another con by the government to try and mask the economic decline/economic genocide they are responsible for).

Or the US government, if they wish to maintain financial credibility, need to compensate oil-and-gas investors for their equity losses since 2014 - because the low oil price for the past five years has been partly funded by the destruction of Trillions in equity value across the oil and gas sector.

If the world suddenly used zero oil and gas a lot of plants/trees would die as they breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen.

Hence if Barryoe is not developed it would not only result in the regulatory authorities being responsible for the greatest economic decline in history, the greatest mass murders in history (as such an economic decline would cause local looting, fighting, and a massive collapse in birth rates), but also the greatest mass murder of plants and trees in history also.

These people blocking Barryoe are fools …or they don't care about being responsible for the biggest economic collapse in history with all the misery that would entail being inflicted on the global population - Ireland's oil and gas is also needed by fruit and veg farmers in Kenya who are growing the food you are probably eating this week - if you look at the labels have you noticed how much of the food in the supermarkets actually comes from abroad?

Oil and gas is need to grow this food and then to fly/ship it to Ireland and then to distribute it to the supermarkets, and for the civilians to drive to the supermarkets to buy it.

Only a fool would think leaving the Barryoe oil in the ground is an ethical thing to do - causing one of the biggest economic collapses in history and sky high petrol/diesel prices is not ethical in my opinion and if I was working for Providence or the The Regulatory Authorities I would be resigning and setting up a new company with one aim - to just get the oil developed ASAP and all the naysayers can get lost as they are on the wrong side of the debate, and the only people who need to be involved with the new company are the people who can actually deliver the oil rigs and workers to get the oil flowing. Who cares if it needs to be sent to the UK/Europe to be refined - the economic benefit will still accrue to Ireland because that's why the financial system works - in that the oil price is now at a level that oil producers can now afford to get the oil out of the ground after five years of low oil prices when most projects were uneconomic....although that didn't stop many companies pressing ahead with new projects and many shareholders in the oil and gas sector lost everything due to these stupid companies who kept producing/investing even when oil went below $50 which was a largely uneconomic price but possibly orchestrated by the US government to suit their own economic agenda which is based on long-term cycles of low and high oil prices -- trouble was the last low was the lowest on an inflation adjusted basis for the last 50 years (except for 1997/1998), and this destroyed hundreds of billions in shareholder capital in the oil and gas sector - and understandably oil and gas companies should logically now be wanting some guarantees that they won't be double crossed by the US government before investing in a new cycle of new oilfield developments. Or the US government if they want to maintain their credib

The next (revised) CMA decision date will be on 30th April, although I don't know whether they could extend their final decision again because often people in positions of power like to "kick the can down the road" rather than trying to benefit the economy (you only need to look at the UK's lack of new gas fired power plants, the 15 year wait for a decision on Heathrow's third runway, and the lack of will be the government to force land owners to use fields productively for food production or to lose them - something which could significantly reduce food prices in the UK if implemented as well as providing a better quality of food more similar to what is in supermarkets in France and Italy - but as I said these are just a few policy areas where nothing ever happens, and there are many more areas in which the UK economy is being stunted by a lack of willingness of people who have the power to actually make any decision other than deciding not to make a decision).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/02/11/cma-delays-final-decision-sainsbury-asda-merger-two-months/

The person who said why don't I apply for the UK chancellor's job, because:

(1) They don't have enough power to really make a meaningful difference to the economic trajectory of the UK
(2) The role is very poorly paid compared to becoming a CEO - the pay is less than 10% of what the average CEO earns and less than 0.001% of what many successful CEO/business people earn.
(3) You have to be political - either labour or conservative - whereas I think a chancellor needs to govern from a neutral political position with the "national interest" at the heart of everything they do.

The point about the UK councils' funding being squeezed by banks was to highlight that it's possible the trend for the next few years will be a weakening GDP/Euro exchange rate - because UK economy contracting whilst Europe's growing (in terms of the financial transfers of currency even if not in output of real products).

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - now it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been conclusively/properly decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - now it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money
ADVERTISEMENT

to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been conclusively/properly decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - now it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been conclusively/properly decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - now it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money
ADVERTISEMENT

to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been conclusively/properly decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - now it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been conclusively/properly decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

Potentially what explains the lack of rationality in the share price is that traders have already paid out to the short bets when in fact the game was still in progress - not it looks like the long might win eventually but there is no money to pay them because they paid the shorters out too early whilst the game hadn't been decided …. only solution is more QE so the longs can be paid …. otherwise you end up with no money to pay the people whose opinions turned out to be right over the medium term just because the short-term people wanted to be paid out whilst they were ahead and before the game had finished. This is a problem for financial markets and is what gives them a bad name and makes many people think they are corrupt and makes it difficult to raise capital - because people are not taking a long-term enough view and are paying out to people as though they have "won" before the game was even at half-time.

But the point is the greens should be encouraging Barryoe as it is less carbon intensive than importing the oil and gas which the economy needs.