Member Info for ps200306

A "strategic review [to] determine the strategic plan" does not fill me with confidence. Reminds me of the age-old bureaucratic euphemism, "progress is continuing". It would be nice to have been told what went wrong with the plan we already had. We know that SpotOn didn't understand how the Norwegian Export Credit facility worked. So yeah, they deserved to lose their 40% for that screw-up alone. But didn't that just mean they needed to raise more via the planned bond? What went wrong there, and why couldn't PVR just negotiate with the consortium and Pareto themselves (as indeed they said they would)? There's something else we weren't told. Did Pareto tell them the bond wouldn't fly? Was it the political uncertainty? Either way, PVR are in a fix. 80% of nothing is worth exactly the same as 40% of nothing.

Celtic Voyager in Galway. Expecting to see it heading southward by the end of the week. Don't know if it was intentional, but probably a good thing that Linn's departure was timed as it was. Even though the survey has effectively zero to do with Barryroe's prospects, a CEO departure straight after it would probably set some less discerning tongues wagging.

LONGWAIT, there is no doubt that your lowercase namesake on advfn is a troll, probably TheShen. Maybe some of your other suspects too. You've just cast your net too wide. Ranger4 is an actual shareholder who sold most of his position back in the spring, with every right to be disgruntled. Anyway, enough said. My main concern is spammers posting twenty times a day and making the board unreadable for the rest of us. Can live with the rest. Best of luck.

LONGWAIT, I am sorry to say that you are starting to sound hysterical. Every poster's posting history is free for every one to view. Ranger4 has been a member on this site for a dozen years, and has posted very constructively on quite a number of companies. He hardly needs me to defend him but he doesn't have the slightest resemblance to our erstwhile troll. And why dwell on the similarity of a common two-word phrase when the greater likelihood -- which you don't seem to have considered -- is that TheShen deliberately obfuscated by emulating other posters?

Back to matters of substance: ranger4 actually posted positively about PVR two or three years back. He's not the only one who has been ground down by the management's abject failure to progress the drilling of Barryroe. It is now over six years since O'Reilly had a near shouting match at an AGM, insisting that he was working his a$$ off and had almost concluded deals on four previous occasions. Not only that, but there were four very interested parties in the data room at that very moment, presumably drooling over Barryroe. Yeah, well, we all know the subsequent history.

PVR have given absolutely no reason to place any faith in any management at any time. The latest fiasco is just the latest in a long line of fiascos. We have absolutely no idea where the company now stands. The only ray of positivity I have is that the idea that Linn left because of a survey result is conspiracy whackery. First, the survey hasn't been done yet, and second, it's a seabed sonar survey -- absolutely diddly squat to do with anything under the surface.

I'd probably only be about 75% as negative as ranger4, but I do basically agree with him. Barryroe is an asset with tremendous promise but strictly speaking it *is* unproven. PVR's number one hurdle is finding anyone willing to punt on a tantalising prospect, who isn't either dead set against fossil fuel investments or running scared because of the current Green political scene.

I presume the IOOA will be looking for a new chairperson also.

Another 10m+ traded on Dublin today.

ThenShen was obviously a "troll the troll" account. With TheShen banned I would guess they are defunct. TheShen had made the board unusable, don't really care about the minor stuff.

Not just very strange, it smacks of insider knowledge.

LONGWAIT, all of those are common phrases -- I've probably used them all myself. And it's hardly a surprise that infrequent posters reappear when there's an RNS. It's not a bad habit, to avoid the somewhat pointless blabber that goes on in the absence of official news.

swizz, for better or worse we have no other option but to await the outcome of the review. It's hard to be optimistic though. Barryroe development is never going to get any cheaper than at present, what with the phased development plan, a consortium prepared to defer costs, and a robust corporate bond market. However, there is a general revulsion for fossil fuel investments and even less conducive is a political situation where a dark green environment minister is responsible for licensing. According to the Biz Post, Ryan will tell an Oireachtas committee today that "Ireland's window to tackle climate change is closing". This in a country facing blackouts from under-investment on fossil fuels and over-reliance on wind. Who's going to invest in a place so determined to commit hara-kiri?

I happen to agree with Mamms here. Linn's hasty departure is a fiasco. He was clearly panicking in April when he hastily announced that the SpotOn failure was only a blip and the funding would be in place by September instead. I'd imagine the major shareholders were quietly seething. Especially when Linn had fallen into exactly the same trap as the Bronze -- entertaining a bunch of chancers who were never much more than the most tenuous proposition. In retrospect, SpotOn was a cobbled together outfit whose "novel approach to field development" was wishful thinking that had never been tried before. What's more, Linn announced that they'd be sticking with the SpotOn approach sans SpotOn. Clearly it didn't work. Makes you wonder if the recent director hire of a PR consultant was to help raise Barryroe funds, or to sell the next equity raise to us suckers.

LONGWAIT, perhaps it's time to change the record. Not everyone is the bogeyman because they happen to put their commas in the same place or use a similar turn of phrase. There's no hint that longtime posters like ranger4 or Mamms are trolls. Can we get back to discussion and save the troll hunt?

Manyana: "I did not say "The Gulf Stream was Slowing" - experts said so."

Yeah, that's the article I was talking about. Quote: "The Gulf Stream (also known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, or AMOC)...".

The Gulf Stream and the AMOC are most definitely not the same thing, ergo your "experts" are not experts. Basically, I do not trust any reporting on climate change as the mainstream media is nothing short of hysterical, and even so-called "science" websites like the one you linked can be little better. I read original academic papers, and since the one that's based on is paywalled the best I can do is a summary by some of the authors available from Maynooth University. There is a more recent paper in Nature Climate Change from August 2021 which I do have sneaky access to ( https://rdcu.be/cspBH ).

Basically, nobody yet understands the dynamics of the AMOC. The August article assumes a bistable state with a possible suddenly switch into the weak mode (called a Stommel Bifurcation). General Circulation Models do not currently support such an event, and the IPCC deems it "unlikely" in the 21st century. There is significant uncertainty about the surface wind-driven component (which is what the Gulf Stream is *actually* a part of). That component is not going to disappear unless the Earth stops spinning -- it didn't disappear even in the ice age. The question is how far south it might be deflected if the AMOC overturning drags it less forcefully northward. For some *actual* expert commentary on this scenario (which incidentally also reminds you that the Gulf Stream is *not* the AMOC), see here: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-looking-at-early-warning-signals-for-a-collapse-of-the-atlantic-meridional-overturning-circulation/

(... cont'd from previous) A slowdown in the AMOC could deflect the Gulf Stream somewhat further to the south, since the sinking of thermohaline current draws it northward at present. But the Gulf Stream itself didn't stop flowing even in the ice age. So is the AMOC slowing down? A recent paper suggests there are a number of early warning signs. But as with many such papers, it's all based on modelling and there are other models which disagree. It's not suggesting that the AMOC could grind to a halt but postulates a bistable state and that the flow could switch from one stable state to the other.

This is all music to the ears of alarmist reporters, of course. Tipping points are a vital part of the daily scare story, because when the world doesn't end in nine years as forecast it will be important to have reasons why doom might still be just around the corner. The IPCC makes no such claims. Even leading climate scientists have been embarrassed by the scaremongering and forced to point out that nothing suddenly breaks at 1.5 degrees of warming. The negative consequences just get worse.

So I am not one of those nasty "deniers". I'm just a realist who recognises that the world is going to use more energy come what may, and we need to be able to generate that energy in a low carbon way that is CHEAPER than conventional fossil fuels and is not fundamentally broken like windpower. So I don't say "DRILL, DRILL, DRILL", I say "bring on the cheap nukes". And yeah, since we aren't going nuclear yet (blame the Greens) we'll have to keep drilling for quite a while longer.

donalb: "And PS 'too many numbers" (TM), for an educated man, you seem to be loosing the run of yours elf, with your recent rants about the Greens & their power & influence. Myself, I have choosen to not fly these 5 years, recently got rid of my big car & have cut my home energy use by 40%, using simple techniques & a little thought."

Good for you, but individual saintliness isn't going to cure climate change any more than is Ireland's solo demonstrations of virtue. Sure, there are genuine opportunities to reduce the carbon intensity of the economy, but exporting your carbon use to somewhere else such as we do with Chinese manufacturing isn't an example. Committing carbon hara-kiri isn't a good idea either. Such self-impoverishment is only a good idea if three things are true:

1) the alternative is an existential risk or, at the very least, comes with a very strong likelihood of even worse impoverishment. My reading of IPCC, IMF, and other documents is that that's not true (e.g. IMF documents on the likely loss of global GDP due to climate by 2100);

2) everyone else cooperates. Is China going to be generating 70% of power from renewables by 2030 like us? Not on your nellie. Then what's the point? The developing world is going to double energy usage by 2050 and, unlike pampered westerners, are not going to be fussy about how they achieve it. How fussy would YOU be if you lacked basics like electric lighting, or were dying from inhaling the smoke from burning cow dung, or living in a country of 90 million people who get 90% of their energy from burning wood? (cf. Congo). Most westerners would malfunction without microwave ovens, dishwashers and electric clothes dryers.

3) related to 1&2 -- your policies have to actually be effective. Wind power is not capable of replacing fossil fuel generation, and is only complementary to it if you triple your costs through 100% duplication of generating plant and add new transmission infrastructure on top. It is a truly horrible "solution" unless you believe that the remaining problems can be solved by regional grid interconnectivity and/or grid-scale electricity storage. I happen to believe in neither of those things, nor do I think it wise to be waiting on a technological silver bullet that there is good reason to think will never arrive.

That's why I think Green policies are stupid and ignorant, and bordering on evil. They depend on promoting untrue horror stories about existential threats from climate change. Which brings me to:

"Didnt Manmentia (TM) tell you that we are loosing the North Atlantic Drift, but why care !!!! Drill Baby Drill."

Yes he did, but he's wrong. Firstly, the Gulf Stream is NOT the same as the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current) despite even some "science" sites conflating the two. The Gulf Stream will not stop flowing unless the Earth stops spinning as it is driven by wind and Coriolis forces. (cont'd ...)

Heaven forfend!

LONGWAIT, some of your equivalences seem extremely unlikely to me.

The only way Graham could buy shares without it being insider trading is if he isn't currently talking to anyone about Phase 2 ... which would be BAD news.

Ok then, BAD posts.

Should read: "****** posts"