Member Info for miker444

O2B agree news due soon and from known drills etc but what is just as exciting are the potential new acquisition(s) we don't yet know about, with the £m's at their disposal the deals could be bigger than anything we have at the moment with returns proportionate.
Steve & Sachin have the knowhow, the energy and best of all the contacts having worked for the big players such as M&G.
More than happy to sit back for a long as it takes for S&S to achieve their 'job done' target, one things for sure it will not be 1p, genuinely believe we can add a nought. Parta 33bcf (potential 300bcf not even factored in!)
atb

simon totally aree, also not all trades showng, I bought another £20k this morning for 2051470 shares and not showing. Holding 10m and thats it for me I will now sit back and wait to see what the cash in sp will be when Steve & Sachin decide 'job done'. Hopefully a lot higher than current sp!

atb

I had to fill or kill for just £3k, got 1.05.

Thanks chesyc more than happy to stand corrected

atb

It would be Lombard's error and not ADL, also I thought it a little strange that once the 3% threshold is reached
( eitherway ) then after that a TR-1 is not necessary and the TR-1 already in existance should cover it for want of a better way of putting it, but happy to be corrected.

Ob1, I also had the same gut feeling in the wording of 'subtle' when it came out and not what I expected especially with EG being the flagship / jewel in the crown as it were ( at that time we, as Tiburn stated, had not had Havieron / Black Hills excepetional news) so I did some reading on MMI sampling and was pleased with the findngs if initially somewhat confused.

What stood out was not necessarily the higher the ppb the more gold resource subsurface at the point of where the mmi sample was taken. I was a bit miffed but it then went on to explain that a surface soil sample of 445ppb could have a lower gold content beneath the surface than one with a surface sample reading of say 45ppb. Still miffed and then it explained it very simply. Below is my wording of how I interpreted it.

The MMI samples contain the 'ions' which travel from the host gold through the underlying rocks / soil or whatever to the surface ( I know we all know that ) but it then said the ppb can be totally misleading depending on what type of rock / geological formation the ions have to 'travel through'. Totally my wording but I am not a geologist but it was easy to understand. So if 445ppb have an easy 'ride' less obstruction / filtering to the surface then that could say for e.g 2g/t exist underneath, again my wording for explanation purposes but if only 45ppb were recorded but had an almost total block or filtering of the ions from travelling through it could still be coming from host source of 50 g/t.

I hope I am not offending anyone here in how I am explaining it and certainly not my intention and naturally as a holder would rather wear rose tinted specs but MMI readings are just an indicator of a presence not an exact science due to the above. It will need the Newmont DSG data coupled with the drilling results to prove it up one way or the other.
I am still on the fence with EG due to the sheer size and possibly a more closer drilling campaign may be needed in addition to the already 24 but have to say with Havieron exceptional g/t intersections and Black Hills increasing the strike from 200m to 800m then we have the luxury to put EG on a slower back burner without any collateral damage to GGP.

atb

'Surface' so not only cheapest costs posible to extract (open pit) if at least 800m strike length (400% increase onprevious) then how far below surface does it go and what grades when host / motherlode found.

This could be on a par with Havieron.

Yes I wasn't aiming it at nomlungo to contradict him if anything I was just reasuring myself after reading the content of the link that it was referring to offshore and not what RBD are involved in.

Does show how things could turnaround and reiterates the case for not putting all your eggs in one basket and fortunately we have many drills on various projects and it derisks that scenario somewhat.

atb

Apologies simon_said I was typing and did not see your post before hitting send button

We are onshore, this refers to offshore

Even better than I had thought and happy to stand corrected. Parta could be transformational in that 49.9bcf is esimated by Danube ($86m NPV to RBD) but there may be a potential further 300bcf and 45m barrels of oil which have not been factored in ( rightly so as not proven yet).

But at $6.95 mcf then that is, if proven, worth circa $2.1bn to Parta. Now we have 29% nterest in Danube who have 50% interest in Parta. This means we have in effect 15% ish overall of Parta, which would give an NPV of $300m for the gas alone, we would have an additional 8m barrels of oil (NPV?).

It does all depend on proving up the extra 300bcf but as this is not factored in to any of our current drill programmes it will not have any effect on the sp if unsuccessful.

If the multiples of sp seem far fetched it is understandable until you realise we are at the very beginning of a company just starting out and that's what makes it possible.

Weapon absolutley correct, all drills in California alone NPV circa $235m, this does include Grizzly Isand which is not until next year but its not far short of 10 x our current MarCap.

Once we add Parta, Wick, Colter, Oulton etc it is not inconceivable that we should be approaching an sp comortably above 10p probably nearer 20p by Xmas of next year.

gumbo if you go to selfshmcnimby post Thu 10:51 there is a link which gives detail, the last section quote 500 bopd is possible and yes it could be less of course so best to wait for confirmation.

Just musing as to how far Steve & Sachin want to go with this and how long they intend to stay before they say job done.

Basically their background and pedigree is superb working with Tier1 Fund Management Companies and they will have been tasked to get the biggest returns on investors money and in the shortest time possible.

So we are seeing similar psyche being applied here but here's my musing, I just wonder if they will get the bug between making excellent returns but after seeing their start up company grow from £10m's to £100m's may give them a bit of a dilemma different direction in that it's in every CEO I think to be the biggest and the best and it mght not be as easy for them to let go once it really gets going (incl acquisitions along the way which are not known yet even to them the 2nd drill for example came out of no where) would they look to become a MidCap Ftse 350 Company or cut and run when it suits.

There does appear to be limitless 'small' low risk opportunities to what floats their boat, in California alone. May be an interesting question at the next AGM as to what will be their final goal.

As i said just thinking out aloud but i do genuinely believe we have in Steve & Sachin a couple of 'city whizzkids' who will achieve what they set out to do and then some.

Excellent short interviews that are to the point and no waffle. Super confident without any arrogance these guys know what they are after, almost 'goal hangers' waiting to poke it home letting everyone else in the 'team' do all the build up. Risk free as much as it can be in aiming for pre-existing drills or areas next door to existing producers.

Love the transformational comments if succesful.

As most on here know it will be the RNS stating that production has commenced and flow rate (bopd) which will then be factored in to the sp.

Despite all the promises there's only one cast iron guarantee which will please the market and that is income / revenue being made and cash going in to the bank, which won't be long.

Just to put things in to perspective we could have had an RNS today which stated that whilst hydrocarbons were present unfortunately the levels were not deemed commercially viable or words to that effect. We got the opposite and apparently so good an immediate decision to push for a 2nd well off the back of it.

We really don't have long to wait for this and other news.

atb

Selfish many thanks for the reply and an excellent find in the article, indeed 500bopd is mentioned and possibly the immediate decision to push for a 2nd well suggests the flow rates will be nearer that end of the scale.
Again California just 1 project out of many.

Any ball park figures at to the expected flow rates / bopd from VG-3. I have had a look albeit not in depth and have drawn a blank. Not important and just being nosey, but it would be great to get a 2nd well as this was not factored in.

Agree Parta could be huge and if the expected 33 bcf of gas does indeed get increased to the potential 300bcf and the extra 10's of million barrels of oil associated with that as well.

Whatever happens from here on in chaps those of us who are currently invested have the satisfaction of being in at the very start of a virgin company's beginnings and the expectations and growth associated with that.

atb

As exceptional as 137 g/t was it was only over 0.5m, the possible game changer still existed in HAD001 and that was the 3g/t but over 121m, it was that which made everyone sit up incl Rio Tinto / Antipa etc.

I can't remember who it it was posted some time ago that for commerciality a golden rule of thumb is to multiply the g/t by the depth and you need a figure higher than 50. Anything aproaching 100 is mind blowing apparently.

So 137 x 0.5 = 68.5, not bad at all but 121 x 2.93 = 354.53. So a comparion is not easy with others but HAD001 has many findings way above the 50 benchmark and I know that is not the only criteria but the 2.93 g/t is far superior than the137 g/t.

Whilst not viewed with exact same criteria by mm 's / markets the effect on sp should be similar. Californa NPV for all wells as previous poster stated is circa £235m that will put sp to 5p - 7p alone.

Add in success at Wick / Parta / Colter / Oulton and sp will be in double figures, comfortably so.

atb