Member Info for ocelot

To date this year, UKOG has proven to be a stock market winner and that has been achieved on what is, for the moment and imho, only a very modest rise.

Is it possible some of the derampers are so attached to deramping they haven't noticed UKOG's year-to-date return of 36.09%?

To what can be attributed UKOG's 36.09% year-to-date return as indicated by the London Stock Exchange?

Imho, it looks as if UKOK had been oversold.

At the current price, does UKOG still look to have been oversold?

The answer to that question is a matter for the judgement of each investor/trader.

To put into perspective the pessimism of some of the derampers, the London Stock Exchange is currently showing UKOG's year-to-date return to be 36.09%.

That is beating the market in general by a wide margin.

The first part of your post is correct. The second part is without any logical link to the first part and, indeed, given the current price of the stock, appears to be unnecessarily pessimistic (imho).

1/ Loxley appeal decision on or before this coming Tuesday, 7th June;

2/ update re the next drill by the partners in Basur-Resan (the last update was on 20/04);

and

3/ following news on 30/05 of the Portland gas storage project.

Biggest volume stock on the market last Wednesday: let's see what the new week will bring.

Agreed, wizard125.

A placing is in itself neutral.

Those who wish to interpret it in a negative sense will emphasise the company's obvious need for funds.

Those who wish to interpret it in a positive sense will emphasise the attractive projects the company seeks to progress through the funding.

and when will it take place?

These are good questions to which nobody (including management, I would have thought) currently has the answer.

But we can all see a potential positive path ahead for UKOG.

If the Loxley appeal decision goes UKOG's way, if a positive update is provided quite soon concerning the next drill at Basur-Resan, then the share price may be re-rated sufficiently for the next placing to weigh less heavily and for it to break free from the confines of the recent past.

There is nothing intrinsically negative about a placing, it all depends on the price at which it is executed.

Think there's been a better "feel" about the stock since the beginning of the year, so don't think anybody would be very surprised to see the price rise, and perhaps rise quite strongly, now.

The derampers can't bring themselves to say it looks like a "buy", but they don't express a "sell" opinion either.

The technicals must be good for barchart's opinion to be an 88% BUY.

The facts speak for themselves unlike some of the ludicrous posts made on here.
---------------------
But what help are facts relating to the months from March 2000 (more than 22 years ago - a mistake?) to February 2020 (more than 2 years ago - a mistake?) in determining prospects for UKOG's share price today?

Market operators seek to anticipate the future and where a share price is likely to go.

Posts which remind them as to how a share arrived at its current price are of an historical nature and for historians, not for market operators.

Ibug,

In your post of 06:28, you tell us what we and the market already know. All of what you post is, therefore, already in the share price and irrelevant to the share price's prospects.

The share price is 0.1375p. Market operators can buy, sell or hold. In your opinion, should they be buying, selling or holding at that price? As of now, you say you have "no opinion".

If all of the bad news is already in the share price and good news (eg a favourable Loxley appeal decision) isn't, then, in theory, the price is primed to rise, isn't it?

ie., they put out negative material, but it is negative material limited in scope to the company itself without any necessary link to the share price whatsoever.

I'll correct that:

it should read FORUM owned directly 49% of Saltfleetby, ...

SEL owned directly 49% of Saltfleetby.

Now it owns indirectly (via Angus) 100% of Saltfleetby (and also has exposure to Angus's other assets).

The above subject is an extract from my post of 07:42. The full sentence reads as follows:

... The result is that, for those who are actually operating in the market, the derampers' posts are very largely irrelevant.

The point is that because derampers rarely, if ever, attempt to assess the degree to which their negativity is already reflected in the share price, their posts are very largely irrelevant to those operating in the market.

The derampers are negative about the company but not about the share price, it is very rare they make any effort to assess the degree to which their negativity is already reflected in the share price.
To make such an assessment requires the exercise of judgement which the derampers either lack or avoid exercising.
The result is that, for those who are actually operating in the market, the derampers' posts are very largely irrelevant.

Wonder what the original dissertation looked like!

GL has prudently used the P90 valuation after discounting at 10%: £25.4m.

To put it into perspective, the P50 valuation after discounting at 5% = £45.8m, 80% higher.