Remember the 'unboxing' pics of the hydraulic-setting tool which posted on Twitter? It's a piece of kit which commonly used by the exploration industry to set plus/packers and wire-lines. I think that summed-up JTP and the whole operation 'pre-verdict' Brockham. It is highly questionable why this kit could have not been sourced immediately within the UK, as pretty much all exploration is affected by ground water in some way. Evidence of a delaying tactic?
RXDAV I hope you continue to post. Your posts are always packed with self-depreciating good humour. There are so many pseudo alphas lacking humility on here and trying to barge off anyone not adhering to their pathetic ramp scripts. GL
I think the swing trading likes of DHC are still likely to make 50-100% profit in the near / mid term. With many potential variations on updates this also looks to be a P&D day traders dream. We have sell, hold or jv scenarios on Brockham / portland. Then you have the planning application on Balcombe and updates on gas venture also on the horizon. The sp could double or even treble in within 100 days or less, so an opportunity for the burned to at least salvage something instead of selling out at rock bottom. Or tempting the masochist lth's to trade their way back up.
RE: may be they plant to depress it12 Jun 2019 18:54
The value gets sucked out by dilution. But the LTholders don't seem to acknowledge this and keep expecting the sp to regain lost ground. If the market suddenly values this at below 4p, then you have to be realistic on how much it would climb now. Look how ukog have decimated their sp over time.
RE: may be they plant to depress it12 Jun 2019 17:59
RA, if this was 5p June 2018, did you not see sense at selling at 16p. The mind boggles. Are the long term holders really expecting miracle returns? 200% in 6 months would the final exit point of most sane persons.
I believe that pr advisers would have an exact l idea of the consternation felt by PI's on reading that old projects may be getting buried under new (gas) projects (or similar implication). They know it's not exactly the news people want to read or hear at this juncture.
Sometimes posters are put down for stating the obvious, but you make an excellent point on the uptake of placing subscription (compared to OO).
I think that there should be some regulatory focus on the purchase of assets in exchange for shares timed at low share prices (when this has proven to be all upside for the asset seller) and at a point of time when there is perceived belief that in overall other prospects may be closer to fruition.
Regarding the proposed gas asset purchase, usually a seller agrees to NDA and there may be a retainer bound to this. So it could be already adding to cash-burn.