Member Info for oilmagnet477

Hyper - I'll agree to disagree - I take the point about resource requirements (as an ex web designer) but it actually doesn't need all that much to provide a little more than is currently there IMO. Appreciate the rational debate though - a rarity on this board!!! As far as seeking investors/shareholders PR is very important - accepting that delivering on promises comes out top by a long way :) Stoned - get some therapy mate. I'm not bashing BNR, just making a simple point. You don't have to agree, just choose to engage in a polite and constructive way rather than making sarky comments whilst ignoring the actual validity of any argument. I'll not be back

Thanks Hyper - I appreciate that the info is there, however I still maintain that any self respecting PUBLICLY LISTED company with a large holding in a.n.other investment would make all possible efforts to provide information on those projects to investors in a readily digestible format. I am fully aware of the need to do your own research etc but having some sensible pointers is what the majority of investment type companies on AIM do (and there are plenty). OK, so BNR may well be sorting out a new website but not before time IMO

I'm not denying any of that might happen! However, I do strongly believe you are in the wrong job. You should become an MP at the first opportunity - YOU NEVER answer a direct question!!!

I have read the RNS's (or at least some of them) but are you suggesting that BNR providing at least some signposts to information on their website is a bad thing?

Can't even find anything about NASHWAN on Google unless BNR have invested in a dead horse? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nashwan Clarity=improved investor confidence?

Stoned - seriously do not understand where you are coming from? I joined LSE in 2012 - so that makes 5 years for a start off! Equally, can you deny that the BNR website provides any specific detail on it's investments and what they actually mean or involve? I mean, even a link from their site to Xantus might be helpful: http://www.xantus-inc.com/lithium-exploration-portfolio/ I assumed my question was a reasonable one and not an attack on you or BNR per se. I am not bobble or do I operate multiple accounts. Maybe try reading other people's posts and understand what they are trying to say before responding at half C0ck Thanks for nothing

Perhaps here lies the problem with BNR. Like Tom, I was a little confused as to whether or not BNR have an investment in BGS. Spending time looking at the BNR website reveals precious little information about any of the company's specific investments (unless I'm missing something?). The latest presentation goes into great lengths about the sectors BNR are focused on but very little on the ACTUAL projects into which they are invested. A casual observer or potential investor may well be somewhat confused......

what exactly is CE supposed to say? He is dependent on others for news flow - one of the biggest problems of 'investing in others' rather than investing in yourself is that you are then at the mercy of others. It makes me laugh how some get so hung up on results being due on an exact date. The RNS actually said that it expected work on phase 1 to be complete within 2 months - that does not mean that results will be issued at that point. It is interesting to note the number of people who clearly want out on a spike before moving off to the next big thing. If anyone thought AIM was for Investors, they're having a laugh!

Financial Review H1 2017 revenues of US$510,290 We have 159 wells in production. On that basis - $511,000 is equivalent to $3213 per well - extrapolate that to a full year - $6426 per well Rita's mantra was always about payback on investment of developed wells - strikes me at these levels, magp will be lucky to ever see a return on investment? At an average of $30/barrel - that's about 215 barrels per well PA (over the last year hasn't oil averaged higher? therefore reducing daily production further?) If one assumes average production of 300 days per well per year then the daily rates are hardly inspiring.(0.72 BOEPD) Strikes me that the SS/RFW original strategy has failed significantly overall BUT the new deal with WED where Magp make money out of developing for others is a much safer move. Let's hope that this takes off in a big way in H2 GLA

Apologies - missed that this had been posted early yesterday!

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-i-let-go-reins-bos-michael-travia?articleId=6313491268215410688#comments-6313491268215410688&trk=prof-post

Irrespective of RLH current SP or shares in issue, IMO this acquisition/RTO or whatever it turns into, will be structured on the agreed value of the asset (backed up by AIM documentation - hence the suspension), the amount of cash needed to be raised divided by the number of shares issued. This will be determined by what investors are prepared to pay for the size of the asset - by way of an example, Keras Resources did an RTO of an ASX listed company to create a new gold mining entity on the ASX - the listing valued the asset at $20 AUD/ oz gold where the industry average in the region is closer to $50 AUD - this attracted investment with shares sold at listing for 2c (raising $7.8m AUD). Since listing the shares have increased by 60% as investors now see positive news flow etc. Not a ramp for KRS (although I am invested) just using it as an example - hope that helps

Any suspension that RLH might end up in isn't automatically nailed on for 6 months. If the BoD fail to get a deal over the line by the 28th August, it could then come at any time thereafter (assuming you believe a deal is to be had?).

So, it looks like SOS plan has catastrophically failed? I don't think this is over. SOS has taken a massive hit, selling his shares at 0.06p, surely he isn't just going to lie down and go quietly? Rita has shown some major guts and really seems to have pulled this back from the brink - however, the WED plan needs to deliver some major benefits - as with Theresa May, she seriously needs to learn lessons from this debacle and IMO change her management style - particularly around comms to investors. We need a clear strategic direction with defined goals and a plan as to how and when we are to achieve them. This at least will give SH an idea of what to expect along the way and allow some sort of gauge as to Rita and Co's performance delivery against defined targets - pretty much everyone else in industry has to work against these sort of requirements - time I think for Rita to do the same. We now know she can deliver in a crisis - how about day to day?

"SP unmoved on RNS??" 37.50% up would indicate otherwise.........

NTOG!

Wonder who okenia is kicking today then........ Great turn of events today. Good one Rita - no wonder she was keeping her powder dry. What baffles me is the SOS must have known - maybe he was against this (but then nothing he has done would indicate that - HTOG didn't mention it, or TW for that matter....... GLA

I know, let's all take the word of some low life scum who threatens to discredit company's who don't shell out for a stand at his organised investor event. That sounds like a great working strategy. mmmmmmmmmm...........

I say this with the obvious caveat that I am not and never have been an experienced 'oilman' etc etc and much as I detest TW and his methods, this last detail really does merit consideration. In a previous role (within the last 3 years), I worked on a Govt project which required £4.5m funding from both the EU and the Heritage Lottery Fund. The project, essentially operated by a Project manager on less than £50k PA and a project officer (muggins) on £24k PA, successfully managed to raise the funding and the project is now in operation (although I am no longer involved) and will be on-going for 5 years. Whilst this may seem like peanuts, RFW (and SS) were never responsible for actually doing any drilling (except for 1 example which is probably best glossed over.....) so it does beg the question - "what exactly does she do to warrant that level of income"? I hate the way this has happened - I do not think SS comes out of this with any credibility - surely any of the issues that are now playing out should have engaged the 75% odd of shareholders to whom this has come as a complete shock........

stis - I really can't see how SS would sue MAGP or RFW. He resigned and left the company so it wasn't as if he was 'unfairly dismissed' or anything like that. Therefore, what grounds would he have to sue? MAGP is an oil and gas company, not a tech firm. If SS wanted cash to support No 1 Son thenyou'd have thought he'd have gone all out to max value in MAGP before selling rather than the fire sale approach he has adopted. All smacks of sour grapes to me.