Member Info for Phoebus

Irrelevant. This is surely the last placing before Total drill Venus-1 in Namibia in Q3. I expect GBP to rocket as that approaches just like it has done before other third party Namibia drilling. I also expect GBP to give some bullish spin on Namibia developments to help spice the rally. Excellent chance of 1.5p+ within the next 3-6 months IMO. GLA

so looks far too cheap at these levels. GLA

so looks far too cheap at these levels. GLA

Good old efficient market hypothesis. GLA

After an epic move down the last two weeks followed by a very abrupt rebound, what will BTC do next? Dip to $50K or higher from here. Given the size of the down move and the breach of the long term log support line from $10K, I would expect a fairly protracted consolidation in the low $50-55K range to build a base and rebuild confidence, so I reckon we will dip to $50-52K, consolidate for a while and then move higher. What do you think?

After an epic move down the last two weeks followed by a very abrupt rebound, what will BTC do next? Dip to $50K or higher from here. Given the size of the down move and the breach of the long term log support line from $10K, I would expect a fairly protracted consolidation in the low $50-55K range to build a base and rebuild confidence, so I reckon we will dip to $50-52K, consolidate for a while and then move higher. What do you think?

What can I say. One click and there I am. Someone likes me I guess. ;)

I disagree. If you look at the RNS statements forensically almost all the holding are easy to ascertain. The only issues are the following. 1) The exact quantum of the ETH holding. In the best case it still only accounts for a small percentage of NAV. 2) Any BTC holding? There is no hard evidence of any BTC holding apart from a general reference at one point. Surely if they had an actual holding it would be mentioned by RNS just as they have done so for all other holdings. 3) How many coins have we acquired through staking. If we assume 12% average yield across portfolio and a holding equivalent to 6 months staking, half of which have been sold, then we can add 3% to the baseline NAV.

I disagree. If you look at the RNS statements forensically almost all the holding are easy to ascertain. The only issues are the following. 1) The exact quantum of the ETH holding. In the best case it still only accounts for a small percentage of NAV. 2) Any BTC holding? There is no hard evidence of any BTC holding apart from a general reference at one point. Surely if they had an actual holding it would be mentioned by RNS just as they have done so for all other holdings. 3) How many coins have we acquired through staking. If we assume 12% average yield across portfolio and a holding equivalent to 6 months staking, half of which have been sold, then we can add 3% to the baseline NAV.

Those figures are from Lomcshizz and he admits himself that they are no more than estimates. The BTC one looks particularly spurious and I see no evidence to back it up whatsoever so I would discount it entirely.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EwMedA1WQAA5Vvj?format=jpg&name=large

I would point out again that my holding figures were derived first hand by reading very single RNS since KR1 started. I repeated the entire process to double check it and compared it with Lolm's data when I became aware of it at a later date, so I am confident in my findings.

Those figures are from Lomcshizz and he admits himself that they are no more than estimates. The BTC one looks particularly spurious and I see no evidence to back it up whatsoever so I would discount it entirely.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EwMedA1WQAA5Vvj?format=jpg&name=large

I would point out again that my holding figures were derived first hand by reading very single RNS since KR1 started. I repeated the entire process to double check it and compared it with Lolm's data when I became aware of it at a later date, so I am confident in my findings.

Eggs, I have found no data for an actual BTC holding. If I remember correctly I think Lolmcshizz reached his BTC holding by doing some balance sheet inference and making some wacky assumptions. I consider it no more than hocus pocus and would completely discount any BTC holding unless you've had confirmation from the BOD.

As for the ETH holding, KR1 have mentioned an ETH lock in 3 times (1000, 1232 and 1000 ETH), but it is unclear whether the ETH mentioned in the first lock in was rolled over in to subsequent lock in, so we may inf act be double counting. In any case the ETH figure is not that high.

Current NAV is around 136.5p by my calcs, so we are a bit over at present.

Submitted once, yet posted twice. Never seen that before.

according to my calculations.

according to my calculations.

4p seems generous.

5p this year, would be £521M market cap. Even if drilling was scheduled, that would be beyond ridiculous. Filtered.

Upon second admission the total voting rights will be 10,426,409,576. Using this figure as this website does the current market cap for BOIL is effectively £11.5M.

https://investegate.co.uk/baron-oil-plc--boil-/rns/proposed-fundraising-and-chuditch-psc-earn-in/202103240700162575T/

VLRM looks monumentally overvalued. I think their intended hash rate equates to around 15 machines and when I looked the other day I think it was roughly 75 times more expensive per unit of hash than ARB. The posters on the VLRM board don't seem interested in maths which is ironic. Leave them to it I say.

Except 88E actually did have imminent and important drilling news. Even so their SP only started to price it in three weeks in advance and not 2-4 years out. Also 88E was insanely overvalued ahead of the result, so I would not recommend that metric to value BOIL.