Member Info for ps200306

Oh sure. I was thinking of "significance" in terms of those with 40p to 70p averages who probably aren't hugely helped by being only 85% down instead of 95%.

Manyana, there is one irrefutable brute fact: Barryroe has not been successfully farmed out in seven years. You could explain the first few as PVR's misguided focus on other assets. You could excuse the next couple as due to the 2014-15 oil price collapse. But by 2018 prices had recovered well above current levels. And we still only got chancers kicking the tyres. I suppose if APEC ever had the money they might have got cold feet due to the price fall from above seventy to below fifty in the last two months of 2018. I can't explain why PVR has never found a credible farminee. Nor do I have to. The fact stands on its own. No bleating about Barryroe's merits can refute it.

That's a lot of rises ericnat. But who here would buy more shares on the announcement of more drilling? Seems to me everyone is looking to get out, not in. I hope I'm wrong as I have bought an eye-watering number myself. And clearly sentiment is at rock bottom, so I don't see us languishing at tuppence for the next two years. But _significant_ rises? ... I think SOU will have to show us the money first.

As I said before, I really don't see anything big in terms of dividends _or_ share price rises until Tendrara gas is flowing. After that we may see a significant improvement. By the way, whats the situation in the UK for people who earn dividends from shares on which they are making a capital loss. I presume there are still income tax implications.

Unfortunately, I think that major oil companies have an interest in getting into new oil provinces at an early stage. The idea of drilling only existing areas in Ireland, where the government might not now grant further licenses even where a field turned out to have greater areal extent, would be less attractive. This, combined with the track record of PVR, leads me to believe that Barryroe will never be drilled. That's even before you consider other negatives such as the waxy nature of the B'roe oil. I'd be very pessimistic about PVR at this stage.

Here's an example of another country -- Morocco -- which has decided to go for primarily renewable energy and has the biggest solar plant in the world ... but still doesn't spit on its indigenous hydrocarbons:

http://northafricapost.com/36200-tendrara-gas-wells-to-cover-30-of-moroccos-needs-minister.html

The Irish approach is virtue-signalling nonsense which will _increase_ CO2 emissions over time.

"The collapse of SAG after a leaked letter seems to be having a positive impact on the share price....lol."

That was probably me ;-) I hoovered up 600k at < 3p just before trellis's post. Have completed my averaging down, as much as I'm ever gonna. If this deal gets done I expect to see half my money back over time (maybe more, but I'm not holding my breath).

I don't think the share price is going to rocket any time soon, including after the deal is signed. Look at the number of people on this board looking to get out on any rise. I think this will be a severe drag on the share price all the way up. I don't expect to see much increase until gas is flowing and dividends are being paid. Personally I'm prepared to wait for a return, so will be hoovering up another load in the near future while the aversion to this share persists.

Airing the dirty washing in public doesn't seem like such a great idea. The misgivings that made me leave the SAG seem justified -- there are people who only care about getting their pound of JP's flesh, and damn any other consequences.

Fez and his rancid brother never held more than a few hundred quids worth, couple of grand at most. That's the irony of having to put up with (or filter) a trollish post for every share he's ever held. And right now he holds none.

Excuse my ignorance, Longwait ... who is PB that you keep mentioning?

Jones for god sake, if you're going to keep banging on about it at least learn the difference between multiplying by 2 and dividing by 2.

Re: McCoss ... Providence doesn't need a new exploration director. It needs a bucket load of cash to fund development of Barryroe. A very, very large bucket. After years of trying I see no reason for optimism. Just maybe, if Providence goes begging bowl in hand with a farm down of 80 or 90% of Exola, it might attract a dependable suitor. Even at that it would have to happen quickly -- perhaps implausibly so -- with cash up front to keep the lights on. Personally I've put the PVR shares in the bottom drawer and mentally written them off.

APEC (CNOOC) is not a thing. The alleged relationship between the two turned out to be illusory. If you read Providence's announcement of the farmout agreement from 28-Mar-2018, it refers to APEC as a private company with a "strategic relationship" to COSL, and to COSL as a majority-owned subsidiary of CNOOC. In fact, APEC was merely a middle-man between financiers and oil services providers, and turned out not to have any clout as TO'R discovered to his cost.

PNE, I don't think the GSA would make any difference. We had a GSA update on 1st May and an MOU on 30th October. Neither caused an upward blip and we were trading at six times the current price on 1st May. And thinking about it, with a potential partner lined up the gas price is less important than getting the current deal over the line. Even if a deal is completed we still have to wait for FID, and for SOU to announce what it plans to do with the money from the initial transaction before we have some clarity on where the share price is likely to go. It's still a long road ahead. However, I'm on your side -- I think now is the best buying opportunity for SOU, certainly in as long as I've been around. I already tried buying in the days of hysterical exuberance and that hasn't worked out so well. Buying when there is a total aversion to the share seems like a very considerably better bet.

Indeep71: "I’ve a few questions for the board"
My tuppence worth... all completely imho and nothing else:

1. Have we hit bottom yet?
No. The SOU share price has always drifted on lack of news. There probably won't be any before February. My sense is that with a more sombre mood among investors, the company will be loath to volunteer information beyond what is mandated.

2. Do we think SOU will exist in 12 months?
Of course. It owns a substantial share of an extremely valuable asset.

3. Is anyone other than me crazy enough to top up to bring their average down?
Yes. I've done so twice in the recent past. I feel desperately sorry for investors who would relinquish their shares at the current low price -- what have they got to lose? ... but I'm prepared to take them off their hands.

4. If we do exist in 2021 and we start to drill will the interest come back?
If you mean will the share price rebound merely on the prospect of more drilling, no, not a snowball's chance in hell. Those days are gone, not just for SOU with its particular history but for the E&P sector in general. I believe our proper NAV can only be realised by bringing gas to production, which is why I think the current deal is the only game in town. The share price will rise in proportion to the company's dividend-paying prospects and nothing else.

Thank god for the filter button. When I take a sneak peak at some of the unrelenting wailing and gnashing of teeth on here it makes me cringe. I can empathise with people nursing large paper losses, being in that boat myself. But to those who shriek for vengeance because they can't take responsibility for their own investment decisions -- I wonder just what are you trying to achieve? Your hope of recovering some money rests with the company striking a reasonable deal. Some people are screaming blue murder about JP and miserable Moroccan geology at the same time. For god sake, man up, admit that nobody held a gun to your head, change the record, and let's move forward from here. This endless snivelling has to stop, even if only because it is detrimental to your own interests.

partridge, that's the second time you've asked the same question. It's already been answered: "it is the intent that Sound Energy would see the same proportionate value from the transaction whether it be a farm down of 24.2% or 33.2%."

My interpretation is that if it's a farm down of 24.2% leaving us with 23% we get a carry on our 23% interest. If it's a farm down of 33.2% leaving us with 14% we get a carry on our 14% interest. Since the latter carry is worth less than the former, we would be due a refund from the carry portion of the first transaction in the case that the additional 9% is taken up. The difference in carries would be to the tune of $23.4m ( https://i.imgur.com/2dwScxX.png ).

That actually provides me with one small glimmer of hope that the purchaser might not take up the extra 9%. They have to pay 55% of the cash up front, and a further 30% upon FID. Only 15% is retained until after first gas. In the initial transaction the first two tranches are 85% of $54.3m. But after the extra 9% it's 85% of $118.8m. That's an extra $55m in cash the purchaser has to come up with up front -- $101m vs. $46m. That's a lot of money on top of what they have to raise for the infrastructure costs.

Wile.E., many thanks for the Malcy transcript. I hadn't bothered listening to it, 'cos I kind of knew what would be in it. As long as the deal is conducted along the lines indicated, his prognosis seems perfectly fair to me. There is a huge amount of upside to this share from where it is. My pet peeve is still the extra 9%. I see no rhyme or reason to it. We get a little over $40m extra in cash, and lose over $200m in gas revenue over the life of the field, even if no more is discovered. It seems to me we are giving away about 12p per share for nothing. My other pet peeve is that I topped up too early at around 10p, but then again at 3.5p and will certainly go again if the price drops more. I wish my average was lower, but that's the way the cookie crumbles after the drilling failures.

After costs, debt, etc., the value here is substantial. Surely it's time for those convinced the share is worth nothing to put a sock in it (not to mention those rabbiting on about vampires etc.). As Malcy said, you can work it out yourself with a calculator and at least two people on here have already done it for you. If you think it's worth nothing, show us your calculations.

All that said, I'm one of trellis's co-complainants. I see no harm whatever asking some hard questions and looking for as much clarity as possible. I didn't realise we'd be mailing the FCA too, but ... meh. Whatever.

Manyana, someone who keeps switching the goalposts can't be argued with. No mention of those pesky algos in your last post, so I presume you've given up on that idiotic line of argument. As for San Leon, are they offering to buy your shares at the same proportional valuation of the asset as they value their own? No? Then their valuation has the square root of diddly squat to do with the market price of PVR. You can whine all you like about PVR being undervalued, but unless you can find someone to pay you what you think it's worth, it is all tosh.

Anyway, I think someone has to be big enough to stop this silly discussion going in circles, and it sure as hell ain't gonna be you. So you are henceforth on ignore.