Member Info for NigelHaemoglobin

Same, added more sub 2.3. In the success case will sell down slightly and buy more PRD. A fantastic share according to a few wackjobs, a reasonably prospective one to me!

Another viewpoint may be, we agree that our investors understand both O&G standard procedures and investment risk.

Are you happy with this basic premise?

Still working towards that elusive MENSA membership Mk111? You are the very stuff of NVQ1 burger flippers.

Well done Mk111

Not exactly MENSA material are you? Holding through multiple dilutions (with very probably one or two more on the way).

Stick with the Bradford and Bingley.

Indeed

Unless a duster or ambiguous result I reckon that the last tranche at 2.4 has been successfully grabbed, thanks v much to all who wobbled today, very helpful!

All of the information that you require is on the North Sea Transition Authority website, formerly the Oil and Gas Authority.

Given the lack of a fully documented field development plan (why would they have one? still studying the field!) I think the reason for the P&S is regulatory.

The appraisal well will greatly add to the information files and it is more than likely that future sub surface producers and injectors will be on a new set of coordinates.

Either way, calm down. Risky enough gamble already without emotion taking over.

When did you speculate about todays' Sterling to Dollar exchange rate? What use is reporting news to investors if you failed to call it?

You failed to call ANY dilutive placings. Caveat, I do not read all of the ramping tripe spaffed on this BB so may have missed it.

Ok, understood.

Nobody on the BB today understands the range of financing options from resources booking to development.

QED, only around 10% of investors manage to conserve capital, 5% make serious money and the rest are financially exterminated.

Sheer Darwinism! No pharking idea at all.

Meant to add, loans or bonds would be the least desirable option until reserves are booked. As we all should know thanks to the PRMS revision FID will be required before RBL is possible, something of a Catch 22 scenario.

There some shareholders here with well in excess of one million ord shares, I have considerably less but add on weakness. Will be happy enough on or around 250k shares given the risks inherent in E and P.

Can we agree that, in the success case at MOU-2 that we lobby to fund development via open offer? However if a discovery is stellar then it would be reasonable to divide CAPEX between a reasonable placing (if the mcap is sufficiently high) and an open offer or rights issue to we the holders.

Only problem is, I don't perceive PG as one of this planets' most advanced communicators...

Hi, the mcap looks well established in the right direction for such high risk wells. Reading up on Helium and may join the party in the future...

Good try cheeky old chap, even in E and P companies which eventually succeed only a minority of shareholders make money. The reason? moronically not adjusting holdings around placing dates, probable dusters and possible discoveries.

I have done my best to help by accurately calling three out of four placings very close to RNS release: my fourth call was a bit early re 'placing or partner'. PG admitted that he doesn't have much patience for due diligence but reasonably enough they declined to give 50+ percent of the company away.

We can't all win, GRH looks in a good position but I don't pay much attention to rampers or sycophants easily sucked in by guff.

'Little' Nige is well in the blue thank you hoho.

Hello

You are a liar as I have truthfully stated on many posts that I do own shares, not CFD's, SB's or other phantoms but ords, only around 200k's varying +/- 10% and occasionally just a handful before openly calling the placings.

Try and desist from make-believe, I'm assuming you're not in the Brownies any more?

Androcles, with respect we are not aligned yet. It is a classical statistical problem as currently presented ie we know that many risks theoretically exist yet we do not for the moment understand exactly (in italics) which set of real life problems which could affect the commerciality of any particular well.

The examples I gave were analogies; of course the manifold curses of heavy oil management are not present in MOU-1. Try Bayes theorem, fascinating maths which quantifies the difference between statistical risk and real world outcomes.

PG has decided to crack on and attempt a development, giving the impression on Proactive that the due diligence expected by a farm in partner would be annoyingly expensive and protracted. He may have a point but that is his call, we can adjust our holdings in accordance with how logical and rational we consider him to be.

On another note am I the only investor bored by the guff and twaddle about the outfit not being in debt? It's great not to have the sort of junk bonds which have nuked dozens of mini E and P's but less nimble investors are constantly being diluted by placings!

Afternoon Androcles, sorry missed your post. The answer is, we cannot know (PG and LB would agree so email them) what is required until the CT testing. With luck the task should be both straightforwards and low cost. Let me provide an example.

Egdon performed clean up ops at the Wressle field where I have a nicely developing holding in one of their partner firms Europa Oil and Gas. What we hoped would be a two or three week operation expanded into months eventually requiring a proppant squeeze (basically a reduced volume hydraulic fracturing procedure). Clearly a different case to Mou-1 but an example of cost escalation.

Thanks for the question and just think in terms of cash burns and you'll do well investing in E and P.

Did anyone else, that is those without blinkers on listen to and comprehend PGs comment re MOU-1 sands? It's not the end of the world but we may need to re-enter the well and geo-steer to create a horizontal completion imvho. Many years ago I saw such a design with highly technical loose sand clean up process technology.

We will have to wait and see how the rigless testing proceeds.

Hello diss

HARL is, for the moment languishing along with about 25% of my portfolio. I am totally relaxed about it and have gathered more sub 10p. A strong flow of news is imminent in my opinion, dividends within two to three years are possible.

Can't win them all old chap.

Companies with substantive financial resources rarely if ever plan wells based purely on 2D seismology. The positive here is that we have a potential discovery which does remove some risk from follow up wells.

Yes is the answer to the fizz gas issue as Oz will confirm. Yes access to knowledge via the internet can be useful if context can be understood.

Many years ago I attended a Royal Geological Society lecture, purely out of academic interest. Fizz gas was explained as a phenomena which can create seismological artefacts. So if you do drill into such a formation it quickly becomes apparent that you have a 'water wet' outcome with modest volumes (non commercial) gas.

The reason I brought it up is that we have NO definitive proof (read the PRMS) that this field will be commercial until at least MOU-2 is a discovery and we know more about MOU-1.

The drill bit is the ultimate arbiter, no matter how slick a presentation is. Always think in terms of cash burn (huge) and drilling/geo risks. FID and reserves booking is for the future.

I do not think that a geo degree is required to understand the SPE PRMS, two or three A levels probably.

For the moment EOG looks good for a spot of light trading to accumulate, a stellar result at Serenity and of course todays' alternative CPR re UJO point towards dividends but not, I would suggest for at least a year. You never know though!