Member Info for rossannan

Sturm

“But asymmetrically attractive if execution is merely ‘good’”

It’s not really execution risk we’re talking about with CR-3. Not at this stage - you have to assume that even TXP cannot muck the execution up. It comes down to what the Carapal Ridge pool still has to offer (why did it take 19 years for anyone to dip a toe in it again?) and whether geology yet again throws TXP a curveball.

Stas20

Obviously AIM gold and silver plays tend to be early stage. This bull market is mature enough to be lifting these kind of early stage plays now, not just the Fresnillos anny longer, and this is confirmed when you compare GDX and GOEX. So you can see that elsewhere early stage plays are doing very nicely. Not on AIM though. AIM is for companies with crap management and crap assets, basically.

Stas20

“That’s a rather silly comment of course shareholders know the risk, there is a reason why TXP has such a tiny mkt cap and the share price is on the floor, but thats why people invest in AIM high risk high reward…”

Is it a silly comment though? Yes, folk look at AIM and, particularly if they fall into a nest of rampers on e.g. Discord, convince themselves that AIM is high risk high reward. The statistics are clear though: AIM is high risk low reward. There are exceptions now and again where a high reward materialises that nimble traders can bank, but TXP clearly had its moment in the sun years ago and the last few years have been a slow reveal of poor management and poor assets.

Look at the ongoing bull market in precious metals. Look at how mainstream gold and silver plays have performed - it turns out elephants can jump! Then compare the performance of AIM gold and plays - a few bright spots but much poorer performance on average. Tells you all you need to know about AIM.

Stas20

“only the actions of the company can do that”

Spot on - it seems that the only thing that will convince shareholders that TXP is a ridiculously risky proposition is those risks actually materialising.

Sturm

More to the point, what does commercial success for CR-3 look like?

Not sure that ChatGPT’s prognosis properly reflects the size of the TXP debt mountain, to be honest. It’s not about whether your take is positive or negative, it’s about whether it’s correct. The take on CR-3 on here is remarkably similar to the take on Cas-5 at this pre-production stage. And look how Cas-5 turned out: good luck getting the figures for current Cas-5 production out of TXP.

“Here’s what would likely happen to Touchstone Exploration Inc. if its Carapal Ridge-3 (CR-3) well were ultimately unsuccessful (i.e., if it failed to deliver commercially viable production or the expected reservoir performance):

🔹 Financial and Operational Impact

1. Reassessment of Development Plans and Reserves
If CR-3 is not commercially productive, Touchstone would likely need to re-evaluate its Central Block development plans. A dry or underperforming CR-3 would weaken the case for additional Herrera development wells that the company has been targeting on the block.

2. Negative Pressure on Cash Flow and Capital Allocation
Touchstone relies heavily on successful drilling outcomes to drive future production and funds flow. An unsuccessful CR-3 outcome would reduce near-term production growth and could mean lower cash flow than expected, making it harder to fund operations without additional capital raises or debt. The company is already exposed to drilling and operational risks that could materially affect results if targets aren’t met.

3. Potential Need for Additional Fundraising
Touchstone has financed past drilling and development through equity issuances and debt. If CR-3 fails, the company may need additional funding to continue exploration or development, potentially diluting shareholders. Its financial metrics, including debt and working capital, are sensitive to drilling success and commodity cash flow.

🔹 Strategic and Market Consequences

4. Share Price Pressure and Investor Sentiment
Exploration companies like Touchstone trade significantly on drilling success and forward projections. A failed well could lead to share price weakness, as investors would reassess future growth prospects and risk. Although not a guarantee, such outcomes historically weigh on small-cap E&P stocks when exploration disappoints.

5. Higher Perceived Risk on Future Drilling
Unsuccessful results could increase perceived technical and geological risk among investors and partners. That might lead to higher capital costs or more cautious future planning, particularly for exploration and appraisal wells.

🔹 Licensing and Operational Risk

6. Continued Exposure to Drilling/Exploration Risks
Even with setbacks, Touchstone would still be obligated to fulfill licence and work commitments tied to its Trinidad and Tobago acreage. Poor results could force the company to either drill other prospects to retain rights or negotiate with partners/government, which could be costly or dilutive.

🔹 Possible Upsides Despite Failure

7. Data Value and Technical Insights
Sometimes an “unsuccessful” well still delivers useful geological and seismic data that refines future drilling plans. If CR-3 still provides insights into the subsurface — even if not commercially productive — it might benefit other prospects on the Central block or neighbouring acreage.”

Dvharrison

Do not put it past Harry to come up with another RNS that in fact moves it down.

Kievsky

It is hardly grumbling to suggest that this one won’t make any significant progress without positive news, which is all folk are doing.

Interesting to see this ticking up in the absence of any news. Must admit that I was expecting it to be fairly flat until the next meaningful RNS.

What worries me about a share buy back scheme is that other, adverse, news flow could lessen its impact. Lump sums in our hands will do exactly what it says on the tin, whatever Roland gets up to with the rest of the proceeds.

Kievsky

As gordon1237 points out they have very little control over when the first tranche might be paid and are in no position to offer that precise a timescale to investors. And from that it follows that the they are in no position to exclude a further raise. I don’t know what you and sajad are trying to achieve, but you are really not helping.

Kievsky

“If they attended the AGMs they may see Roland and the team in a different light.”

A huge mistake that PIs make again and again with AIM BoDs is personal contact. If these guys (and they tend to be guys) have one skill set, it is the snake oil salesman’s bag of tricks. If they want to preserve their capital PIs need to stand well back and be brutally objective. AIM BoDs must always be judged by what they do and how things pan out over time.

Sajad

“The question about a further raise was raised directly at the GM, the company confirmed that there would be no further raises and we expect the first tranche of sales proceeds within 2-3 months”

Talk is cheap. I bet they wouldn’t dare RNS any of that (if that is what they actually said). Do you believe them?

Wolfman79

I wasn’t at all happy with the supposed AIM savings we were quoted. No breakdown was given but from my dealings with other AIM tiddlers I suspect that the figure quoted included costs not wholly/exclusively attributable to AIM (maybe even costs not attributable to AIM at all). I cannot prove this though.

Gordon1237

I believe they’re expecting a Lower Tax Withholding Certificate this month - once they have that, the pressure will be on them to firm up on figures. Any nonsense along the lines of “we were going to give you £x but you voted against delisting so now it has to be £y” will not be tolerated.

Kievsky

That is an unfair characterisation of what is a simple challenge to a statement that is very hard to believe. Sajad said:

“however i personally spoke to some institutional buyers and they really like the look of this where is it as and where this is going...”

Who are these institutional buyers with house rules unlike any other institution’s, rules that have allowed them into a microcap like SYN in a size so meaninglessly small that it is not even declarable?

*cigarette end then

sajad

“however i personally spoke to some institutional buyers and they really like the look of this where is it as and where this is going...”

they sound like absolute numpties. what institutional buyers would touch a share like this: the *** end of yet another multi-year aim failure, itching to go private?

Gordon1237

Fingers crossed you get at least that. But timescales stretch and stories change. At least we managed to successfully fire a shot across Roland’s bows. If he still wants delisting he will have to deliver the deal and commit to an acceptable division of the spoils.