Member Info for mrc_mrc_mrc_mrd

I should also say I am grateful for Steve’s input keeping us all right!

Well to make a profit and generate shareholder returns of course!!!

What else are we here for??

Chris said that we had tens of millions in tax losses. We don’t.

They are worthless in terms of what should be attributed to the current market cap. The company has applied 100% discount in the accounts because there is no visibility of when / if the losses can ever be used to offset future profits.

I have argued the toss on this one because it is another case of Chris writing half truths with nothing to back it up. It helps everyone to have a truthful understanding of the company

Ok, so if we ever make £5 million profit then these losses are worth about £1 million pounds.

I can’t get too excited about that. Greenan may make an operating profit, but corporate losses will negate that.

They urgently need to scale.

Aloj - I disagree. Without oil we don’t have air travel or shipping in the scale that we do. We don’t have huge numbers of chemicals and the products derived from them. We don’t have personal transport saving a huge amount of people’s time.

We basically wouldn’t have global trade on the scale that we do. The lavish American lifestyle supports billions of people around the world and has given them the time and productivity to develop technology.

Capitalism plus oil = 7 billion

Chilting - there won’t be as much demand for their products. Supply and demand. That is just life.

Oil is ubiquitous, coal is not. If there is a better alternative then it will be used!

Indeed Romaron - there is no magic bullet.

At best I think we can slow demand growth for the next 10 years and at that point start to bring it down slowly. Coal is an area where it is possible to see big reductions with more renewables and smarter grids. Oil I think will be with us for a lot longer.

Oil is the reason we can sustain 7 billion humans.

Yes but we don’t “trade” and certainly don’t make a profit from it. So the losses are worthless, particularly if they can only be used for a few years.

The company itself has chosen not to attribute any value to the losses.

Chilting - the 80% can accept a realistic plan that is costed. We need that, not a load of rubbish from climate activists. At the end of the day individual choices will drive the change led by sensible government policy and regulation.

Thank you Steve - yes I had seen that in the AR, but they specifically say they have not made an allowance for that as they don’t have any expectation of being able to use the losses.

I am not an expert but presumably a sale of Ruvuma would be a capital gain and therefore trading losses for corporation tax would be useless?

Do you foresee any scenario with current assets where they could utilise these losses?

Chris - still waiting for that figure in black and white.

The accounts show zero so I will stick with that.

We’ve already got you down from tens of millions to £5 million. I expect we will see you come right down if you are man enough to admit you got this wrong.

Steve - have you got some reference for the £5 million?

Maybe if you are so concerned you should sell up and invest in something you consider less risky?

PMG is solid in my view but it is an AIM listed oil and gas company (with some renewables), so not for widows and orphans as they say.

He will do whatever keeps his mates happy

His mates are the people who pay for his kids and his holidays in the Caribbean

He gives not 2 ****s about Hippies up trees

Carrie of course has his ear. But she is a good Tory girl and knows that donations come from winners like AB.

As an investment company they do not have Much in the way of UK tax loss benefits. As Steve says losses can only be carried back a year or 2.

There are specific North Sea allowances which obviously do not apply.

The only thing they could have is Tanz tax losses but I can’t see anything reporting such losses in the AR.

Please advise Chris if you can.

There is a huge difference between £10s of millions and zero millions.

Also remember that we must make a profit in order to utilise the losses. I don’t see any chance of that in the next few years. Tanz it will be 5 years from now at best.

Chilting - the media have created unrealistic expectations on climate change. The truth is beginning to reveal itself.

Seems you have bought into the big lie. Not much less deluded than GKB!

Please refer me to the section in the AR, and I am happy to take it all back.

Yep as I thought nothing in the AR

More rampy bollcks from you?

Fortune - you clearly have a political axe to grind. I’m not sure what you are doing on the BB to be honest. Are you invested? Or just here to tell us all about remote risks? How generous if you are!

How does this thread relate to PMG please? Which of our assets are at risk in your view? Seems to me you are scaremongering

Hi Chris - do you have details of these tax losses and where they can be used?

The man is an idiot.

But it’s perfectly sensible approach. If the market thinks a 25 year development is a good idea then let them do it. All government can do is control demand through policy a little and regulate the production process to reduce flaring and cut CO2.

As far as Enquest goes, I expect that hub developments / use of existing infrastructure will get the green light for many years to come

Consumers will not tolerate a reduction in supply and increased costs.

We are going to get a rude awakening this winter with gas prices. This is what happens when we rely on Russia.

Sorry, 25 years, and first oil I guess a few years away.

I am in favour of cambo, but at some point these long cycle projects might stop being economical.