Member Info for RNSTranslator

"Great how RNSTranslator disappears when his own calculations showed this was cheap"
Not gone anywhere - dealing with the clowns over on RBD.
If you're referring to my $300mm calculation then whats your problem?.
it may be worth $300mm if it flows commercially... we don't have that info yet.
That'd be $50mm to UJO, less CT of course, thats about .2p per share Divvi max.
How do they get this to shareholders? are you happy to pay 30% plus tax on your divvi?
You then have to consider what the stuff thats left is worth? Say .15p
So in your hand .14p in post tax divvi plus a share worth .15p
Thats .29 assuming it tests, and they sell it and they don't issue any more shares in the meantime.

Rubey you need to up your game:
"first of all they claimed B was a 'duster'"- B1 was a duster, B1z found a hydrocarbon column. You need to be more precise, you seem to be in denial that B1 failed at the KA level and the Cadeby.
"'.. it won't flow commercially' when EWT is complete and proves it flows as the short A test has nodded towards"- just how has the A2 test nodded towards commerciality? Did it flow at a commercial rate? Did it decline under test? You claim to know but yet you provide no evidence.

"I know more about the reality of this licence area than you will ever know" - really?
Sorry I didn't realise you were an expert in oil and gas licences... you're so understated in your postings.

"Utter rubbish. They found enough to warrant paying out £4m plus to drill WNB-1. So they knew exactly what they'd got at WNA-2, and it was very good." - really can you share with us what that was?

"someone from Rathlin said West Newton was sitting on an oil lake. This seems to have been confirmed by the findings at WNA-2" - an Oil Lake , what's an oil lake?

"Personally, I don't think he holds shares, so when the share price goes over 3p, which I don't doubt it will, he will not be participating in the profit-taking" - so you're along term commited holder waiting for 3p

"Can't wait to escape this bb. Good RNS and I'll be gone for good, much to the pleasure of many, no doubt." - This might betray the reason for your enthusiastic promotion.... despite your commitment above to 3p a share, you just want a good RNS then you're off! at least be consistent - are you a holder or a flipper?

"What a knob" - classy!

“ distorted perspective of reality”.
Happy to hear your perspective of reality,
Folks ramping the shares with little or no knowledge of the reality of what they’ve invested in never like to hear a balanced view. Yes this could be a very large accumulation but the simple fact is that is yet to be proven...not the nailed in 19 bagger that some nut jobs would have you think... yes I’ve admitted it could be large but the risks are higher that you might think...

I post nothing that any company hasn’t either said itself, or Facts and analysis based on the material they present.. if you choose to believe in Santa then that is of course your prerogative. The simple fact is most of these companies are big on hype and low on reality... followed by a bunch of retail punters talking ****** about stuff they know nothing about... hoping to get a bit of a price action so they can sell and make a few quid whilst pretending to be believers in the ludicrous upside they promote...

I think folks are understandably wary of this being the next RNS:
"Upon the delivery of an Advance Notice, the Company is required to make a public announcement that it has delivered the Advance Notice, stating the amount of the Advance requested and the dates of the applicable Pricing Period."

The £5mm equity draw down facility.
This was put in place following the acquisition of Humber's 16.66% interest. Clearly designed to cover any cost overruns and the fact they had increased their direct paying interest in B1 by the equivalent of UJO's existing interest.
In addition they have just invested another £600k in Corallian, which I'm not sure was wholly expected.
The sidetrack from B1 to B1z was not part of the original plan and so I'd not be surprised to see this before too long, although I'm sure they'll want to hold out until the first test delivers some news flow...

"Does the above mean that all results from all drills at the West Newton sites have to be completed before any ultimate conclusions can be drawn regarding Commerciality?"
The results from the current B1z and A2 wells and the results of testing will need to be analysed before any decision on commerciality can be made...
Key results will be :
Actual flow rates of oil and or gas and if there is any observed pressure decline and pressure recovery analysis.
What is the liquid element, condensate or oil and quality (ie,. any nasties that will need special handling)
How much well stimulation (if any) is required i.e. acidization etc
Both wells will need to be seen to be in pressure communication to enable a strong inference to be made that it is a single accumulation of scale.
Although some limited testing was done at WNA2 the results (or partial results) were not released either because they were inconclusive or they were felt to be unrepresentative because it was cut short.

You are free to believe what you will..
The upside case included the area drilled by the B1 well which failed to find anything other than gas shows and which came in deep..
This means that:
1: The mapping they were using to calculate these numbers was wrong in the B1 area.
2: They are not yet able to accurately predict from seismic the KA over the structure or the KA reservoir type.
If you'd like to argue they can then, why did they drill the B1 location? I'd argue they were going for the KA (and Cadeby) upside with a fall back position if it didn't work...and it didn't.
What makes you think any bidder is going to pay for "upside" which is by definition unproven, (otherwise its not upside is it?).
I'd like to hear your view on value rather than the more eloquent "you're an ar*se"
Perhaps you could give some us values per barrel or BOE?, development costs, opex costs and sustainable flow rates... based on some ball park averages?
We're waiting....

Condensate is often be worth more than oil, the comments that the liquid phase is black suggest its either a light oil (good) or a Black Condensate which would be unusual and perhaps devalue it from a regular "clear" condensate...
At the end of the day the testing will answer all of these questions, although I suspect we\ll only hear what they want us to hear...no detailed technical data to make a proper evaluation....

"Even though you yourself are also a ****, your figures are some of the more justifiable ones I’ve seen, all be it on the low side (and I wouldn’t expect anything less). "

A well reasoned argument from an "expert"...
I'd like to hear your reasoned case for value... or are you just keen to dismiss any that don't fit your "belief"
Why is it low? Just because you say so?
Step up or shut up....

"For me there's the added 'value' from location of the asset. The damn MAIN gas line from the coast to Humberside runs THROUGH the West Newton field boudary (Between WNA and B well sites). This literally knocks MILLIONs of quid and MONTHS off the development to revenue potentially, not including the proximity to the end user!"
Overly simplistic I'm afraid:
Firstly it depends on entry specs into that line, the gas in it has been cleaned up and brought to entry specs. Both Pressure and the chemical constituents of WN gas will be important, you cant just bung you're raw gas in the pipe even if it is just over the fence...this'll require a gas processing plant to condition the gas and remove any nasties and then compress for entry.
If its asa really extensive as they say then there will be a number of drill centres to be connected to the processing plant, It may be easier to build a pipe to Easington and get them to process and condition for a fee rather than build your own...
Of course there are some folks on this Board who think its worth £3 billion... beyond deluded.
Don't confuse NPV10 (which they'll trot out) with value... its misleading in the extreme.

A. How many BOE is in the ground at West Newton (recoverable).
There is no such thing as a BOE. There is gas or liquids.
A BOE for Gas is simply the energy equivalent of a barrel of oil NOT a value equivalent. 1 BOE of gas is about 58 Therms.
UK gas prices have ranged from 12p a Therm in May to about 45p a Therm today. Thats £7 ($9) to £26($33) per BOE
So as an annual average, a BOE of gas had a value of around $25 bbl for 2019, 2020/21 is being forecast at $20/bbl.
The only figures we have are still to be updated 211 bcf IN PLACE and 146mm bbls IN PLACE of Liquids.
Recovery factors for gas are usually in the 60-80% range depending on reservoir quality, Oil from Carbonates is likely in the 30-40% range at best... these numbers will require reasonably uniform reservoir characteristics across the entire structure to be valid.
So thats 160 bcf (28mm boe) and 50 mm bbls recoverable of Gas and Oil respectively.
B. How much $ per BOE ‘in the ground’ do you value West Newton at.
Undeveloped unfinanced onshore oil will be valued at probably +/-$5/ bbl of Liquid and $2-3 per BOE of gas, depending on the appraisal certainty, proven production rates and especially development costs ( A shallow field covering a large area will require more drill centres and hence costs )... if more appraisal is needed (See PVR and Barryroe) then it will be less than this.
This gives a number in the region of $300mm for the lot...of course the devil is in the detail, and it will ultimately depend on how many buyers, what alternative options do the sellers have, the degree of de risking still to do i.e. do the current wells give confidence in the areal extent of the feature and the quality and/or variability of the reservoir over the entire structure.
From my experience the key element is how many bidders are there and how well appraised (de risked) is it.

Neither Rathlin or UJO mentions the 118m column and the reason is likely this:
RBD mention that this is “in conjunction with the B1well”
We know that came in deep and had gas shows in the KA, but was not suitable for testing and had different characteristics from WNA2. If this was deeper gas then how can you explain gas over “oil” over gas?. they must know the gas oil contact as they mention 20m of gas over 45m of liquid hydrocarbons in WNA2. So either this extra column is above in the gas column or deeper and so below the oil. As the well sidetracked to a structurally higher location it must be therefore that this extra column of 50+m must be below the 62 m column in B1Z. If this is below the gas/oil contact it must be oil...however that doesn’t fit with the shows they had. If there were oil shows they would have said oil...
It seems to me that they are including the shows in B1 to extend the column. You cannot have gas over oil over gas in a single accumulation so the gas in B1 must be a separate accumulation (but untestable)... so my take is that neither Rathlin or UJO want to say that because it’s not really correct to say 118m (if it was why wouldn’t they say so?)
Perhaps someone should call the Nomad and ask if they are comfortable with the 118m...
In due course I think this will be dropped...
I do expect it to flow well, but we will need to know the pressure information to assess commerciality...

Heid
I'm afraid you're deluded 3p - Really??
Thats a £666mm company (assuming no more fund raising) , quite a rise from the current £32mm
Can you explain what you think each of these is worth in your prediction in £'s
-WN (assuming a commercial flow)
- Wressle
- Biscathorpe

I'm keen to see how you still come up with this number even after the shares in issue is now 20bn?

"Never expected an RNS. As a private company, Rathlin are under no obligation to report anything. RBD and UJO have to abide by operator’s decision on what to announce and when."
This is not true, listed companies have to release price sensitive information immediately regardless of what a privately held operator wants them to do, and is a standard clause in any joint venture. Listed companies will of course have to discuss the timing of release to ensure all shareholders get the same info at the same time.

"I pay people like you to fill in the gaps " .. likewise!

"Not wrong am I"
Well thats at least a start... what bits are you not wrong about?

"What a knob...."
Well thats a well reasoned argument.
Suggests to me you don't have one to make..

NOFKINCLUE:" the grim reaper still thinks the price will be higher over the next few weeks even though he's trying to p155 on the bonfire"
What you can't understand is that on one hand I think is that there is a 70-80% chance price will rise on finding gas in the sidetrack, but I don't like the Corallian asset, because the economics in their own presentation is not realistic.
You're so used to thinking folks come from a position of either all bad or its all marvellous...shows you are unable to make a rational analysis, your just an uninformed promoter with an agenda. Why would I say its likely to rise just to 1: get my shares away at a good price? or when I dismiss the Corallian investment some folks think I'm trying to drop the price to get in...Childish gibberish.
My agenda? there so much uninformed B*ll**** on these Boards by some folks who know fck all about oil and gas and what they're investing in I'd like to challenge them to put forward rational arguments either for OR against...strangely they seem not to want to enter into that discussion... for obvious reasons.

“Sorry but the SLR report confirms at least 150billion cubic feet of gas-that’s why I invested again via the warrants.”

That may well be the case, the simple fact is it’s neither financeable nor is it economically investable at less than 45p per therm.
Perhaps you could explain where you think the financing will come from ? and why you believe an annual average price for gas at 45p is realistic, when all the data suggests otherwise...