Member Info for Scenicview

Anybody think today's EU decision to cut off all Russian gas imports into the EU by Jan 2028 could benefit AST.

Clearing the path for an early bid on PANR?

I for one value the ongoing analyses presented by Scot. Whatever side you are on it’s difficult to contest the quality of the work. We are getting professional standard for free! The detractors have yet to present anything of the same quality. Anything at all really! What I really would like to see is the counter case as seen by 88E management. Not in the form of RNS speak but specifically addressing Scot’s points. Too much to ask that they identify themselves (that would be nice) but as an anonymous AIM contributor would be fine. If the case was presented with a modicum of fact and understanding we would soon twig it was them.

FTR I’m a very long term 88E holder but transferred a large percentage to PANR some time ago. And should 88E have success at Hickory-1 in March I will sell into any strength.

FYI I finally was able to sell my 500k shares. It took about 15 transactions over 2 weeks in differing quantities. Min 4000 shares and max varied depending on reasons only known to HK broker.

Above all strctly IMO of course. Scenicview.

Same situation. Bought in early based on the technology, the business opportunity and the hype on AIM. Lived through all the shenanigans with move to HK, locked out for many months, owners found to be fraudulent and more. Somewhere in the company background there is a person with an english name and there is a secretary with a chinese name. From time to time we get scraps of info from them. For the rest its pretty much full opaquicity. No notion of running a publicly quoted company whatsoever. With the background of China slowdown and un-verifiable business case, layered with suspicions of culturally driven business practises I'm finally getting out. And that is proving to be a challenge also.

OK, April it is. Meantime RB or Ivy are very welcome to send a few pearls toward their long suffering shareholders.

Thanks for the feedback.

You put the counter case well. Can you tell me when next results are due and next reporting dates. i'm trying to figure out whether to hang on and what for.

Been invested in CNEL since 2015. A decision based on ethanol sector promise and a belief that China and Chinese companies would be leaders in an industry that aimed at emissions reduction. It’s been a disaster as all LTH’s will know. I broke my own investing rule on company transparency and more fool me.
Now I think we have just been dealing with a philosophical difference in business ethics. On one hand is the centuries old approach to making deals and obtaining contracts. The capitalist method of raising finance, encouraging investment via open communication and selling the enterprise story to the business community both directly and via the markets is just too transparent.
And what exactly does the mysterious RB do as an Executive Director? He is now apparently on his way to China. Does he have the slightest influence on what this company does? I’m not holding my breath.

Thanks Olderwiser. If I have understood correctly you think the Alkaid2 flow back is perfectly normal as the rock stabilises around the proppant near the well bore fractures. Furthermore this was probably expected by PANR as part of normal well fracing operations even if a degree of latitude in amount of flow back must be accepted. You also feel that the shorter 5300 ft horizontal WAS the more conservative (testing) section I was asking about.
I’m left thinking that all is proceeding according to standard procedure and that once again a little knowledge (as in my case) is a dangerous thing. I suppose PANR could do more explaining but I’m beginning to realise that oilmen just prefer getting on with the task at hand.

I am a long-time investor in PANR. My limited oil exploration knowledge comes from the company’s publications and I read most of our LSE PANR oil experts commentary. The following comments and questions are posted with no other motive than to educate myself if anyone should be prepared to respond.
The Alkaid2 drill used a certain frac sand anticipating tight formation. Higher than expected flow back of sand suggests better porosity than calculated and has lead to sand obstruction and the current clean-up operation. This is taking some weeks and probably contributing to the share price drop. My question is why not have experimented with a short section rather than the full 5000 ft? Once correct sand and other testing parameters established proceed to full length frac and test. Would this have reduced time and cost?
What will happen if Alkaid2 cannot be cleaned out and the long-awaited production test has to be abandoned. Will this mean a re-drill?
Previous Theta West well suffered a set-back based on sub-contractor error resulting in a shortened test with attendant costs and less data. Is the current set-back a result of over confidence or lack of horizontal well experience? And does PANR have best in class drilling knowledge, experience and/or control over operations?
What is the likelihood that such problems would have resulted if a major oil explorer or producer had been partnered into PANR which could have happened prior to last season’s drill program?

It is those ‘reasons’ we can only guess at that undermine his credibility. I think that’s the point Scot has been making.

Come on Brombarb. You need to refute these allegations (Scot wed 23.48). Many of us are supporters of Scot for his knowledge of the market and the quality of his posts. This is not some middling punter. I for one would like to see a spirited rebuttal from you challenging Scot on his accusations. With corroborating evidence.
In general, a person will attempt to refute an accusation that they consider has no foundation in fact. So have at it Brom.

At a time of shortage and sky-rocketing gas prices in Europe Slovenia should surely be racing to open the Petisovci gas resource. Instead, what do we have? A long sorry tale of ineptitude and cronyism against the background of a feeble European Commission and Parliament. Over the years I have written to all these bodies as well as the British Ambassador and received ‘we are not prepared to get involved’ responses. In the case of the seven Slovenian MEPS not even an acknowledgement of my letters which I wrote politely and factually on 2 occasions.
It screams Russian zone of influence and is therefore a dead duck IMO.

I posted a while back about registering concern with the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. I went through that process raising the transfer and subsequent share price collapse and the general lack of transparency and responsiveness. The bottom line being CNEL seen as a poor representation of the HK exchange for international investors. I received a reply that said no further action as the case did not represent a breach of listing rules. I suppose other investors had made similar approaches to mine. Whether these complaints had any impact is impossible to tell. Now the company is under some sort investigation. The future appears unclear to say the least. The old adage comes to mind… ‘be careful what you wish for’.

Once logged into my Google account I can ask for edit access and that request goes to the excel owner. I have done that and await your reply. thks

https://www.sfc.hk/en/Lodge-a-complaint/Against-intermediaries-and-market-activities/Complaint-form

Likewise for the spreadsheet. Not sure how that works but you can add my 520,000 shares. For information I have lodged a complaint with the HK Exchange Securities and Futures Commission. There is an on-line form and under the 'Other' category I mentioned the share fiasco following the re-listing to HK, the news blackout and the failure of CNEL to respond to any enquires. I added that CNEL was a poor advert for the HK exchange and that international investors were entitled to a certain level of transparency from HK listed companies.

Suggestion and question for DW. If you intend to continue in oil exploration why not try a drill where others, obviously better qualified, have not previously been and abandoned.
And do you know anybody in the oil industry? Was there no intel on why BP abandoned? I have to believe industry insiders knew the real reasons BP left. Reasons which have now so painfully been revealed to us.

Invested since 2016. Average 2.1 Minus 70K. In last 6 months have written to the European Parliament and the British Embassy. Repeated the economic, legal, environmental and political case for the Petisovci development as advanced by AST in their dealings with the Slovenian authorities. The EP office replied that the matter could only be handled by the Slovenians. The Embassy said the same. Also written on 3 separate occasions to each of the 7 Slovenian MEPS. My letters / mails have been respectful and factual asking MEPS to comment as representatives of a Member State. Unfortunately, none of the 7 MEPS have acknowledged, much less replied, to me. Easy to be wise after but I feel AST were poorly researched going into Slovenia. Also that Colin was not the savvy operator needed for the complex circumstances. Investor communications have often been weak and many posters have aggravated the situation both with the BOD and the Slovenians IMO. I also cannot understand why our new Operating Officer JB has remained silent. There is some cynicism here in the treatment of PI’s. I am not optimistic for the future whether via the legal claim or the remote chance of a restart to operations. Any outcome must be a good distance away. All IMO.