Member Info for Santos1

Divi says he has shorted RKH starting at 42p and now his short positions average 63p.

I presume you are not a professional shorter ( they don't disclose their entry points to market makers).

I am baffled as to why you think there won't be any news. You are obviously another of the ones on this site who can't be bothered to do any basic research , or the same person under different identities.

You also say ' all the heavy rampers have sold' . If you are referring to long term holders, you are wrong.

I agree with the poster who says you should stick to buying index funds.

p.s just a thought, but you don't happen to live in a bedsit up north, by any chance? If so, please go away again.

' Rock are well funded regardless of the upcoming vote ' .

Correct.

Anyone who disagrees might want to spend five minutes carefully reading the company's announcements on its funding arrangements before posting more tosh- it would be considerate to other users of this chatroom. .

' For every sell there is a buy'

How very true

'Both are skint'

Do you actually own any shares in RKH- presumably not if that is your opinion ?

Call me old-fashioned but spending five minutes on basic research before you post a load of rubbish is usually considered polite to other users of chatrooms.

' I know for a fact its not the reality on the ground'

Personally I don't give any weight to conspiracy theories but you are entitled to believe whatever rubbish you want to ! The facts are as stated by the government two months ago. The Falkland islanders are free to determine their own economic development.

FULL STOP.

' I am certain that there will be no FID without government approval'

Fact check:

''Falkland Islanders can determine their political status ....and pursue their economic development freely " .

Extract from the official statement on the Falkland Islands delivered by the RT Hon Baroness Chapman of Darlington on behalf of the UK government, published 28 June 2025 by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

Happy says: ' I said RKH is fairly valued [ at 82p ] . That's not me being negative but recognising that this is the best place RKH has been in for a long time'.

Earlier this week you confidently told us that the UK government has to approve this project before it can go ahead, which has been shown to be complete nonsense. You have not challenged that , but have simply moved on now to make yet another equally confident and equally specious assertion.

Now you confidently claim that fair value at FID is 82p, without making any reference to the detailed NPV10 calculations posted by JEBR and Steve012 in August which as I recall showed fair value at FID for Sealion Phase 1 and 2 would be £1.80.

You don't seem to be aware that 'fair value' is a term meaning the present value of future cashflows from a project. It doesn't mean 'someone's gut feeling as to where the best place is for the share price' .

You are entitled to your opinions but please forgive me for saying that personally I do not give any weight to them.

Borderstothemoon says: ' just bought 14k worth 83.4p will sell at the end of the day'

I don't think you will be going anywhere with that kind if strategy, let alone the moon, but good luck to you anyway !

Hi Marunam 2- the reason is that when someone posts something misleading and/or factually incorrect, we should all try to correct it.

Thats one important purpose of chatrooms, imo, among many others.

P.s. One further thought on this subject.

In the past the UK government has used its unlimited powers, in response to allegations of corruption and mismanagement, to suspend the Constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands, and to threaten to impose direct rule in the British Virgin Islands. I presume it did so in both cases after careful consideration of its legal duty and responsibility under the UN Charter to advance the political, economic and social development of the Territories.

Conversely, a democratic and constitutional decision by Falkland islanders to develop their oil resources is an entirely different matter and would clearly have to be supported by the UK government to fulfil its obligations under international law.

Baroness Chapman confirmed two months ago that the UK government supports the Falkland Islander's right to freely pursue their economic development.

Ditherer correctly quotes from the 2023 House of Commons Briefing Paper 'The Overseas territories: An introduction and Relations with the UK ', which says that as a matter of constitutional law the UK Parliament has unlimited power to legislate for the 14 overseas Territories, including the Falklands. However that same House of Commons Briefing Paper also makes the point that as the administrating power for the overseas territories the UK has a responsibility under the UN Charter to support their political, economic and social development and self-government .

This position under international law was re-affirmed in June this year by Baroness Chapman in an official statement from the Foreign Office : ' We have no doubt about the principle and the right of self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter ....By virtue of this, Falkland Islanders can determine their political status and pursue their economic , social and cultural development- freely'.

In other words, it is not just a domestic issue but an international legal principle which the UK government is bound to uphold.

Happy says: ' UK approval of the project will be needed contrary to what most here believe'.

Fact-check: This assertion is entirely incorrect. The Falklands Islanders have a right of self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter by virtue of which ' they can freely determine their political status and their economic, social and cultural development ' as a self-governing British Overseas Territory [ if you want to read the whole text , google Lord Ahmed's official UK statement on the Falkland Islands in June 2024].

The long standing UK government commitment to the Falkland Islander's right to self-determination was reaffirmed only a few weeks ago in June 2025 by Baroness Chapman in a statement to the Organisation of American States ( OAS). She said that the UK's support for this principle was 'undiminished'.

Let's put this another way in more basic English : any attempt by the Labour government to stop FIG developing their oil resources would be unlawful in international law, and would also be an 'own goal' gift to the Reform Party.

BB Hoppa asks if anyone has a theory why the stock is down today after the positive Navitas announcement . Answer- in the stock market its ' better to travel than arrive'. Some investors routinely take profits/ cut their losses on announcements ( particularly if they bought the stock ahead of the expected announcement). And new investors , or existing investors looking to top up, will be hoping the stock will fall further so that they can get in cheaper.

The same thing may happen on FID- however, alternatively, it may pop up as new larger investors may be allowed to buy at that stage under their internal investment rules, and volumes might increase. Who knows which is more likely ? Answer- no-one. But any initial fall is very likely to be followed by new highs given the upward momentum.

Looking at the bigger picture, there is no way that we have 'arrived'- the train hasn't even left the station yet. At FID ( which possibly could be as soon as next month- or by end March at the latest ) the fair value of the stock is around £1.24 ( based on NPV10 ) - that figure includes Sealion Phase 1 but excludes subsequent Sea Lion phases, and excludes nearby discoveries that can be tied in, and excludes the huge Isobel discovery and other future discoveries to be made . As we get closer to first oil so the Sealion Phase 1 NPV10 figure rises, and it continues to rise every year as the discount reduces. The market will also start putting a value on the other prospects sooner or later, or once production is up and running. It is a new oil province in a highly prospective region, with a stable government ( FIG ) and a reasonable tax regime.

Anyway, personally those are the reasons why I am holding and why I will not be thinking of reducing my holding before previous highs are reached - google 'Lassonde Curve ' if you want to see my personal expectations of how this stock will perform. [ Yes, I have indeed noticed that Lassonde Curve is the name of one of our valued posters, and I know why that is his name].

You will never get your entry timing right therefore it is pointless trying to do it. One accepted way to smooth out your buying is to buy a given quantity every month. However if you believe ( as I do ) that FID is imminent, then its probably best to buy more of your intended holding sooner rather than later, imo.

P.s I agree with Stevo12 that Navitas and Rockhopper would not have proceeded to raise equity if the banks were not on board.

Buzz says : ' possibly millions of shares coming to the market on FiD ( even if finance is even forthcoming) '

With respect you seem to be very confused. There won't be any FID if the finance is not in place !

If you honestly think the senior debt cant be raised by Navitas then my comments are:

1, You have obviously never worked in a bank - transactions like this one are commonplace.

2. Rationally you should sell your shares and move onto another board.

'Overbought' in stock market terms refers to rapid price increases to a level higher than fair value based on underlying fundamentals. This stock is nowhere near fair value. Also volumes are low so any suggestion that there has been too much buying is incorrect. Institutional investing has barely started and the wider retail market hasn't heard of Rockhopper ( yet).

The stock is bound to have frequent corrections ( as we have seen all year) but the momentum is clearly upwards from a technical point of view (have a look at the 5 year chart, where short term fluctuations are smoothed out).

Best to buy and hold, and don't be concerned about frequent corrections. Anyone who was out of the stock on a day like yesterday will be regretting it. Personally I expect many more such days in the coming weeks, months and years.

Its fun to read all the share price predictions. The reason my name is missing from the list is that it was drilled into me when I was a trainee stockbroker countless years ago never to make share price predictions to clients - ' why would you want to put your XXXX on the line for no reason' ?? etc. etc. This is why I have been saying since late 2024 that ' I would not be surprised if the RKH share price goes through 100p before FID' - that was always considered an acceptable formula of words. On the same theme we were often reminded of the title of the 1955 book 'Where are the Customer's Yachts?' by Fred Schwed Jr, a professional trader. The book has a story in it about a visitor to a marina who sees all the big yachts belonging to the brokers and bankers and asks that question. So I guess I am being hypocritical not giving a firm prediction but thats the nature of the profession I used to belong to, and old habits die hard.

P.s re Croft 2's point about US listing, personally I wouldn't mind which main market it was listed on provided it was doing the job of widening the investor base, bringing in more institutional investors, raising the analyst coverage etc. But as a patriotic flag waver and former City hack I would vote for the London Stock Exchange if it ever came to a vote.

Unionjack1 makes a point that Inheritance tax on AIM shares will be 20% from 6.04.26 ( raised from zero tax previously) , compared to 40% on main market shares. This reduction in relief surely makes holding AIM shares for tax purposes less attractive so bolsters the case for a move to main market.

Also- it is not guaranteed that shares in oil producers will get the IHT relief- I understand that HMRC only confirms it on a case by case basis. Doing an AI search I see the biggest AIM IHT portfolio is run by Octopus Investments and they don't hold any oil producers. Of course that doesn't mean that shares in oil producers don't qualify for IHT relief . However, its clear that IHT relief is not guaranteed and/ or could be subject to change . RKH no doubt can assist with answering that point.

Last point- the Board's job is to grow the company for all investors, not just those that qualify for IHT relief. They have a duty to investigate whether main board listing will assist in that purpose- personally I believe it would.

Just re-read my last posting. Apologies- there is a typo in the first sentence. I meant to say 'Supra 3 says stamp duty is a deterrent to moving to the main market' ( I said AIM instead of 'the main market' )