Member Info for rossannan

Corpse

“markets may not understand the full implications going forward”

Or maybe LTHers and the nest of rampers on discord do not understand the full implications going forward. Time will tell.

Crl123

“Give this 6-9 months and I think you will be in a much better place.”

Why do you think that?

Che7win

As you well know, I disagreed with PFB’s assertion that 43p to 86p is a strong possibility.

I still do.

Che7win

“Rossannan has this going down at 21.5p”

As you well know, that is not what I said. I simply disagreed with PFB’s assertion that 43p to 86p is a strong possibility.

Stay classy.

“you say down, I say up at 21.50p”

I never said down. All I did was challenge PFB’s take on the balance of risk and reward. This is the problem with you rampers - anything insufficiently rampy looks to you like calling your beloved share down to zero. Take the time to actually read people’s posts.

They lost Bruce Dingwall and I sold up. But although BD was a very significant loss, it has also become clear since then that they would have struggled in any event with the issues that Mumbo Jumbo describes. My turning negative on TRIN was initially about all the mistakes they made in BD’s absence but ultimately was as much about MJ’s points, which apply equally to TXP.

It is interesting how conversations develop. I originally challenged this from PFB:

“So Circa 20p to me looks like a great buy.

Will i get 1000% back to the heights of 200p maybe not.

But 100% to 300% strong possibility.

The risk reward here is now really good in my eyes.”

because, while I don’t see any reason for the share price to fall much further, I don’t see the balance of risk and reward here as attractive compared to companies that I really like at their current levels (e.g. PTAL and SQZ - neat little acquisition by the latter today). For others on here it all seems nailed on. But their track records on this one are not great (I’m talking about you Che7win) and their accusations of confirmation bias therefore seem a bit ironic. Perhaps crl123’s suggestion of standing back for 6 months is the most sensible suggestion. The less time spent invested in AIM companies the better, I would argue, at least in the ones that are not sufficiently mature to pay a dividend.

Tobin

“And these wells will flow for years and years.”

That really does remain to be seen.

Johnoxxx

“there’s no way he can be right”

Good luck with that approach, but the market is suggesting that I may have a point. Trajectory is the key and sometimes you have to read it between the lines. crl123 makes a good point about waiting 6 months though - perhaps my take will not age well. 6 months ago this is what Che7win was telling TRIN shareholders:

“It’s a good deal because you’re getting TXP paper at a very low price. Think about that and the doubling of TXP production by year end before saying the TRIN takeover is poor value.

If someone else came in and offered you 75-100p cash, I would say TXP with imminent growth is a much better way for you to recover losses and make upside profit on both TXP and TRIN assets.”

That certainly didn’t age well.

Absolutely. The TRIN BoD was still awful at 35p. The one good thing they did was to extricate TRIN from the TXP deal when LO appeared on the scene.

TXP is down in response to specific news items, not the general climate for oilers. Just match the chart against the RNSs.

Che7win

If so, why has the share price continued to decline in the face of those “facts” and your valiant ramping? Is this not similar to the drip feeding of disappointment that TRIN shareholders suffered in recent years? Is the market not in fact bracing itself for the next disappointment here?

By the way, if you I think I was in any way a fan of the awful TRIN BoD/business model you are badly mistaken. I was simply pleased for the TRIN shareholders that they managed to dodge TXP.

*Johnoxxx

PFB

The basic maths, looking at its share of each type of production vs Cas 1, does not confirm that Cas Deep has paid for itself. It may or may not have at this point. Cas 1 obviously has. But where is the evidence that the ferocious declines that both of them have suffered have abated? It was not apparent from that last update, so that begs the question how much profit there is to be made from Cas Deep once it has washed its face.

The point about that 11bopd well is how unreliable Trinidad geology is at depth. As the variety of outcomes that TXP has had in Ortoire demonstrates. What is the Royston flow rate? 0bopd. Has Cas Deep paid for itself? You have been unable to demonstrate that it has. It may now have washed its face but if the average Cascadura well is more like Cas Deep than Cas 1, it all looks pretty marginal for TXP.

The facts seem to be that he cannot show definitively that Cas Deep, unlike Cas 1, has paid for itself even now. So with the ferocious declines that took TXP by surprise, Cas Deep looks like a pretty marginal well. So unless they can consistently replicate Cas 1, which they seem to be failing to do, it all looks pretty marginal with all that debt on board. This is my point about the unreliable geology of Trinidad at depth.

The Jacobin comparison is, as you know, the unreliable geology of Trinidad at depth that can leave you with production of something like 11bopd for something like $10M.

Glad to hear you have checked the individual well performances, just send me the link to put me right on Cas Deep.

Johnoxxx

You were so adamant that Cas Deep has paid for itself but you now seem unable to cite your source. Can anyone else help?

Johnoxxx

Not seeing it in the May 2024 filing. Where did you see it?

Cas 1 has certainly paid for itself. Not so sure about Cas Deep, but happy to be corrected if you have the figures to hand.