Member Info for rossannan

neon

It’s good to see the progress being made by Amerisur, not least because catching that falling knife (more than once) has finally paid off for me, and there is a decent chance of significant further progress. Amerisur is a good illustration of what is possible onshore if you go deep enough and have a partner to share the substantial cost of going that deep. Compare and contrast what LK has planned for the SWP this year - basically a bit of mucking about in the shallow end (and even the funding for that is yet to appear). So I think we do know what to expect from the SWP this year - nothing that is going to bother VSA’s fanciful share price target. There is a lot of rampy nonsense talked about the SWP on here - folk need to get real about what is actually planned and the CoS.

neon

Look back to the first time that VSA popped up here and then at everything that has happened since. Is it not obvious that all this time VSA have just been bandying fantasy numbers around as part of a share promotion exercise? The fact that their share price target has barely changed despite all the shares that have been issued and despite disappointment at Goudron (“Disappointment at Goudron” - good title for LK’s memoirs?) says it all. Any newbies looking in here should at the very least be careful to take VSA, in fact most commentary on CERP, with a huge pinch of salt. CERP is a magnet for rampy nonsense.

offerman

Likewise. A comprehensive update is essential after the way the consolidation of Steeldrum into the Q3 figures masked CERP’s current trajectory both in terms of production and cash burn. The sooner LK kitchen sinks this and addresses the SWP funding issue, the sooner he can get CERP to a turning point. The LIND Facility is the obvious solution - if LK does change his mind and grasp that opportunity before it's too late, who cares what kind of face saving spin he puts on it (“I have decided to use the LIND Facility to accelerate the SWP drilling programme” or something like that)? The important point is that placing ahoy would become placing postponed.

It is possible that the MEEI November production update will be out before the CERP’s Q4 update - something to watch out for as it this would offer a small clue as to the contents of the Q4 update.

Gibbo1066 Likewise - see you all in 2019.

Garnhiem. “it’s as if they’re well connected and organised it what they’re doing.. or” That old chestnut! If CERP had a dollar for every time we’ve heard that one, it would be able to afford its initial foray into the SWP.

Garnhiem.

It’s the funding of the CERP’s proposed operations in the SWP that is the more immediate question.

LLL

I remember how onceatrader used to make various bullish arguments based on the IPSC calculations, or at least some components of the IPSC calculations. The problem with this was that he was using “snapshot” calculations that, funnily enough, never seemed to pan out on an “all-in” basis - in other words, once you worked through the audited accounts in which everything had been deducted, the picture was a lot less bullish. I haven’t checked the exact production figures for the netbacks that I was comparing but they were about 65Kbopd in H1 2017 and 90Kbopd in H1 2018. As you point out, the IPSC calculation is one with many moving parts but while 37.5% more bopd will have helped to improve the netback, does it explain the full 130% more netback at higher WTI one year later? Folk can spin it all they like, lower WTI is, on balance, bad news for CERP, not least now that it is becoming clear that future production growth is less likely to come from Goudron but instead largely from non-IPSC assets more exposed to the ravages of lower WTI.

Garnhiem.

Don’t underestimate the power of retail conviction, although it remains to be seen whether that survives the Q4 update.

emilyt16

A little caution helps to preserve your capital. I suspect that too many people on here have failed to manage their risk and committed a bigger percentage of their portfolio to CERP than they should have. It is easily done, but it is not too late to sell. I have spent enough time on CERP to understand the business and the risks and at the moment they would appear to outweigh the rewards. No doubt someone who invested at 2p on LK’s first day and plans to sell at the end of his first five years will do fine, but why hold through a dip which you can see coming?

HH

Hopefully oil won’t stay down here too long but this episode has illustrated how the rampers who had been talking oil up on the back of supply side perceptions managed to completely forget the importance of demand side perceptions. WTI is not going to spring back up to $75 anytime soon. RRL is obviously bust but TRIN is debt-free and clearly has enough of a cash buffer to ride this out. For TXP funding is an issue and I already spent more than enough time on the TXP ADVFN BB highlighting all that before I sold at 19p back in October. Funding is also an issue for CERP, given LK’s stated aim of letting the LIND Facility expire unused, which is why I am crystal clear that CERP is due another leg down on the back of a placing, even if WTI recovers a bit in the coming months.

Garnhiem.

Or are they just random PIs who disagree with your more bullish take on CERP, particularly at $45 WTI? Surely you can see that at $45 WTI LK pretty much needs a new road map (again).

Bamps21

Getting paid? I wish! Trying to stop new investors and getting shareholders to sell up? As I said before, if presenting a more objective view of CERP has had that effect at any point over the last nine months - well done us! Just look at the share price chart. In the same way, if any of their rampy nonsense has brought in new investors or encouraged shareholders to add to their holdings, shame on the rampers!

Jim1556

To point up the unrealistic ramping both on here and from the likes of VSA and even from LK himself. And because there is a lot to slate, particularly at $45 WTI, and it is arguably not yet too late to sell.

Bamps21

Your list of assets highlights the way in which CERP has spread itself quite thinly. To be fair, it has also spread its risk by doing this and with such a long list of assets it is guaranteed both successes and failures in 2019 My prediction for the failure of 2019, hard on the heels of Spain in 2018, has to be Goudron waterflood, which I expect to be quietly buried sooner or later. Success even in the shallow end of the SWP would of course trump both of these, but this has to be financed first...

Bamps21

What use are all these assets if CERP is struggling to fund their exploitation and they now have to be valued on the basis of $45 WTI? At that kind of oil price most oil assets in T&T are pretty marginal propositions - if LK has any sense he will take the LIND cash buffer to see CERP through to better times. Otherwise it’s placing ahoy!

LGO-fan

Where is the dishonesty in reasonable extrapolations from agreed figures? Less skeptical posters tend to talk their books, putting everything on an unrealistic trajectory and being wrong time after time (whether about production, cash balances, timescales or specific issues such as waterflood or Spain). Why is it that the uninvested skeptics seem to be closer to the mark with their predictions than everyone else? I would suggest that those invested here should try being a little more objective instead of spending their time encouraging each other to buy (or at least hold) and getting over-excited about the handful of posters who disagree with them. Ask yourselves if you would buy CERP today at $45 WTI and if you can be objective enough to realise that the answer is “maybe not”, ask yourselves what share price and/or piece of news would change that. For me the case for CERP hinges on whether LK takes advantage of the LIND Facility before it expires. He says that he is not going to but if he did change his mind I would at least consider a purchase. Otherwise it would just be a case of waiting to buy in much lower in the aftermath of the inevitable placing.

One reason (apart from $45 WTI) why I suspect that the financials are shot here is the way in which share promotion seems to have begun to dictate the way in which figures are presented in RNSs, in a way that is more than a little reminiscent of the old regime:

In H1 we had:

“Q1 peak production of 627 BOPD with 427-542 bopd delivered month on month”

“Q2 peak production of 648 bopd with a steady 530-575 bopd delivered month on month”

And yet H1 average production was only 485 bopd with low netbacks.

Then what did LK do with Q3? He muddied the waters when it came to production in just the same way that he did when it came to cash burn - by consolidating the figures with Steeldrum and choosing not to divulge the metrics for the original business.

A wee short ahead of the Q4 update is starting to look like an interesting proposition. Even if the first rose-tinted view of the RNS is positive it seems to me that once it has been picked apart, particularly if the LIND Facility is finally off the table, sub-2.5p will be nailed on. So here’s hoping that the bid rises a little in anticipation of the Q4 update, misplaced though that may be, to provide a decent starting point for a short (and give folk who have committed more than is sensible to CERP a chance to manage their risk).

offerman

Hope you had a good one too.

Garnhiem. (Sat 20:28) provided useful information about the relative share price performance of selected TRIN oilers:

“Trin - sept/Oct 21p, now 11.5p.... 45% drop
Txp - sept/Oct 21p, now 10.75p..49% drop
Rrl. - sept/Oct 0.09p, now 0.0275p.. 70% drop..
Cerp- sept/Oct 4.3p, now 2.95p..30% drop”

At 2.9p consider the possibility that $45 WTI is no friend of CERP, that it is not too late to sell, that it may only be retail conviction that is keeping share price reality at bay and that you may be able to buy more shares at a lower share price in the not too distant future (if you feel that you really have to).

LLL

This is is not condemned to be a traders’ share - it comes down to the financials that each update reveals (or, as in the case of the last update, does not reveal) and whether they offer a credible basis for long term investment.

Garnhiem.

Surely closer to $3.75m after the costs of the placing.