Member Info for RNSTranslator

I’m not sure GO is putting an unduly negative slant on WN in the BNP analysis.
1: it was paid for by RBD and is published on their website.
2: The analog fields they used were proposed by RBD
3: Recovery factors based on the analogs suggested by RBD are 8-13%.
4: these will require 14-22 wells to achieve.
5: development wells are priced at £7mm each

These are not my numbers they’ve been commissioned and published by RBD. I think it’s time some folks took their head out of the sand on the potential scale of WN. If RBD actually disagree with this analysis why did they publish it in their website, or why didn’t they suggest they did shared with the analysis ????

So Heid, it looks like it's just down to Wressle, given the latest WN figures from RBD website by BNP/Exane.
"We have constructed a low recovery factor success case for West Newton, incorporating the drilling of one further appraisal well and thirteen development wells, recovering a gross 9.9mmboe (8.2mmbbls oil and 10bcf gas). This equates to a recovery factor of ~8%
Utilising our estimate of oil and gas recovery factors, informed by those for the LMG fields, results in a recovery factor of 14%, which we adopt as our higher recovery factor success case.
Utilising the initial production rates per well outlined above, we model 22 production wells for our 14% recovery factor scenario (i.e. an incremental 9 development wells over our low case). This equates to a relatively high density of wells, and would only be achievable with relatively close spacing of wells. It is possible (perhaps likely) well productivity would need to be higher than we have modelled in order to achieve a 14% recovery factor"

First time they've seen fit to published recovery numbers 8-14%
UK average for this formation has been previously published elsewhere as 13%...

"I don't like the word 'ramping'"
So do you still "believe" in 3p (£6) a share as you're not a ramper, or is it now £2.
Can you explain how you get to either of these numbers?
Thought not... Its a belief not a rational argument...

Persimmon: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
RNSTranslator: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p-17p
Flatearther: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
Mirasol: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
Justbe: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
Misstestes: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
Pboo: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p
Mickybe: Posts negative on UJO and they were right 60p - 17p

Just pointing out the facts .

simmering volcano? More like the feeling on the morning after a dodgy Chicken Korma and 10 pints of Kingfisher...

accounts due 2022... not 21!

BMC I can quite see your point, with Persi who went down the stupid comment route...
So - RBD own Gaelic (IOM Holding Company) who own RBD Cali.
Gaelic will become owners of 46% of Daybreak in return for giving RBD Cali to Daybreak (after equity and debt solved)
The value of 46% of Daybreak will be in the order of single figure millions $, based on current values/Mkt caps.
This number is orders of magnitudes less than their previous published NPV's of Cali of £235mm...
Why so much less.. ? and is that specific to Cali or is it an example of how NPV's are not the same as sales value?
Debate..

"The market is waking up now to the value here."
Quite right, to be fair though they have been awake since Aug 2019.

"He doesn't work Wednesdays."
Yes he's a TWOT , Tuesdays, Wednesdays OFF , Thursdays

"Is this the equivalent to a RTO of our assets. Not entirely sure what the value is as California is our only cash generating asset?"
I think this is the obvious route to crystallising vale in Cali.
Its currently just about breaking even according to latest RBD figs.
Value in Daybreak hard to tell just yet, but they say upto 46pct after dilution of a $2.5mm raise and a debt equity swap.
Its listed on OTC so should be a viable route to monetise over time...Probably worth about $5mm or more to RBD.
In Nov. 2018 RBD published these NPVs for Cali (oil price about $62).
Monroe w/o $10mm
Brentwood $25mm
Monroe Swell $100mm
Grizzly $100mm
Thats $235mm of NPV. Its turned out to be worth single figure millions.
Bottom line: Don't equate NPV numbers with value...

"Can you explain your definition of institutional investors please?"
An insti investor such as Fidelity or L&G will have individual funds which have invested in the company. The fund manager has sole discretion as to whether to buy/sell and vote the shares, as well as having to abide by the investment criteria of the fund wrt concentration and marketability/liquidity. An individual investor in that fund cannot control a specific investment, they buy or sell the fund.
Behind nominee accounts are 10's if not hundreds of individual trading accounts owned by individuals who manage their investment as individuals and are the owners of a proportion of those shares in the nominee account.

“What evidence have you used to base the claim the investment sentiment is low in gas and oil?“
Perhaps start here?
https://www.ft.com/content/ed11c971-be02-47dc-875b-90762b35080e
Or here
https://www.iigcc.org/news/investors-representing-usd-10-4-trillion-set-out-standard-for-net-zero-transition-plans-in-the-oil-and-gas-sector/

“Nearly 50% of the company is held by institutional investors.”
Nonsense, those are brokers nominee accounts not insti investors….

So selfish, why no link to it on a the website?
If you have research commissioned why don’t you publicise it…after all that’s what it for isn’t it??
So do you accept the BNP evaluation or not?
Why did they pay for it?
Thk as pg sht…

So clearly they didn’t think BNP would come out with these numbers. It undermines their promotional NPV driven agenda…
Better companies to use if you want the “right” answer, BNP won’t publish fanciful valuations for a few Bob…
#shotitselfinfoot

In summary its Victory or bust..

Selfish:
This is what it said on the BNP report..
“ "The subject Company of this Research report has commissioned Exane to cover its stock and, consequently, Exane has received compensation from the Company for the preparation and dissemination of this research report"
So yes they did pay for it but obviously less keen to see it published!

Cloves
These are numbers from the paid for BNP analysis of the company.. yet you claim it’s negative… maybe that’s why they didn’t post a link to it from their website or mention it … funny that…

TAC
You call it negative spin, I call it simple facts...

Well TAC tell us why the share price is at an all time low ?
Is it because some folks post on this board or is it managements failure to deliver actual value for shareholders...??

TAC you forgot number 11
11: Despite all the above the share price is at an all time low and the oil and gas price at multi year highs...