Member Info for Scot126

Could be a very interesting meeting between Trump and the Japanese PM. IMO, the PANR SP will move up sharply if/when Japan indicates its support of the Alaska LNG project. Watch this space!

hTTps://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/exclusive-japan-weighs-alaska-lng-pipeline-pledge-to-win-trump-s-favour/ar-AA1yaauG?ocid=BingNewsVerp

30/1/25 @ 10:08

markconnor01 - that's your first yellow card for misinforming your fellow forum members. You know fine well that the Dalton Highway, TAPS *and* the proposed gasline run directly through PANR's acreage. Therefore you're talking complete drivel about a requirement for PANR to build an "83 mile pipeline".

To all other forum members, please ignore the post by markconnor01 yesterday at 10:08. He's admitted he's a trader, happy to be in and out of the stock. That's fine, nothing wrong with that in the slightest. What is wrong, however, and highly unethical to boot, is for traders to disseminate false and misleading information on social media forums in order to further their own financial interests. In this case, he's out of the stock and is looking to scare shareholders into selling so he can buy back in at a cheaper price. Pretty basic stuff.

Let me be crystal clear, markconnor01. You may very well get away with this type of illegal conduct on other forums but you're not going to get away with it on this one. You'll be called out and ridiculed. Stick to the facts and the truth, and try to be a better human being.

30/1/25 @ 15:07

Hi Toxicbull - guesstimation on my part but the second half of February would appear to fit the answers given by management in recent interviews/RNSs. Not too long to wait! We know there are going to be 4x 10 day flow tests at a minimum and, like many other posters on this forum, I suspect there's a more than decent chance the company will wish to flow test some/all of the shallowest three "bonus" zones described in the latest RNS. Great stuff.

16:48

Away with you, Brom! You know fine well the Recon Africa result was underwhelming at best. As chrisev1 states correctly, "Only 52 feet thickness and the primary objective in the Otavi above the main fault was not penetrated due to seismic uncertainties." I also noted the "unexpected tightness" of the Mulden reservoirs.

The company appears satisfied with the efficacy of the data collection methods together with the integrity of the data itself. I have no doubt the data collected will be applied to the next drill but was this the headline maker they were hoping for? No way. The SP was down c.20% in Canada for goodness' sake.

Brom - try to rediscover your conscience, if indeed you had one to begin with. Stop trying to draw the less sophisticated punter class into your tangled web of deceit and try telling the truth for once. You're more than sufficiently educated to know fine well that 88E will not be able to play the nearism card on the back of this Recon Africa well result. No chance.

The next deadline for Burgundy to cough up the remaining US$3m is cob on 15/2/25. 88E and Burgundy are not going to be able to create any positive puff pieces on the back of this Recon news. It also looks like they'll be very lucky indeed if they're hoping for news from TS3 at Megrez-1 by that date, being the deepest interval to be flow tested at that location by their NN.

Time to be truthful, Brom. At the current production rate in Texas, *and even if* Burgundy ponies up the $US3m on 15/2/25, 88E (i) will not be active in Alaska until and unless it attracts external capital to the tune of $50m minimum (2x $20-25m for a Hickory-1 flow test and a Leonis discovery well) (ii) will not be able to pay the 2025 sum of US$7.5m due to their partners in Namibia to progress their buy-in to the acreage as per the original contract. Have you had any luck contacting the company who, let us all recall, "are very prompt at replying to my [Brom's] questions"? Have they told you what, if any, penalty there is in the partnership agreement if/when 88E is delinquent in its 2025 payment of US$7.5m? At worst, it will mean a delay before the first well is drilled. At worst, there may be some penalty in the form of a reduced working interest, yes/no?

88E shareholders should be under no illusion, none whatsoever, that the company will not be drilling until this time next year *at the very earliest*. Generally, repeat generally, the small cap investor community does not appreciate such extended periods of inaction and the marginal sellers move on to other stories. Tough situation.

23:22

chrisev1 - I see 88E has reverted back to using "mean" numbers v's "best". So unnecessary and low quality. Hey-ho.

Anyhoo, all very interesting but the drill bit will not turn an inch until 88E finds an external partner prepared to pony up $20-25m for a well at Leonis. Unless 88E is able to create some competitive tension in the farm out process, they'll be lucky to retain 10-20% of the working interest. Look at the geological CoS, 32-33%. Compare that with the NN's CoS of 69% at Megrez-1 and you can see the difference in quality (and scale) of the assets. If 88E doesn't secure the requisite finance by Oct/Nov '25 then there will be very little chance of meeting the proposed Q1'26 timeline.

Happy to be corrected but it looks like the preferred well location for Leonis will be at least 5 miles to the west of the Dalton Highway? If that's the case, an ice road will be required which means a winter season only drill and extra costs to construct the ice road. Earliest drilling at Leonis will be this time next year. AIM and US OTC punters just loooove inactivity in small cap resource stocks. Hmmm....

Much the same with the idea of flow testing Hickory-1. Completely reliant on an external partner. I doubt very much the data collected at hickory-1 thus far will attract third party capital. Note how there was no mention of Burgundy Xploration and its supposed North American IPO. $3m due to 88E by cob 15/2/25. Any forum member found any evidence of the Burgundy IPO going ahead? I can't find anything. Anyone? Brom?

Meanwhile, 88E doesn't have sufficient cash resources to pay its lease fees in Alaska, including the new blocks secured at Leonis in Q4'24, and pay their Namibian partners the US$7.5m falling due in 2025.

Tough position to be in.

Please see below a link to the Senate confirmation hearing for Howard Lutnick, the nominee for Commerce Secretary. Head to 4:54 mins and listen until the end. Yet again, a member of the Alaskan delegation in Congress (Senator Sullivan on this occasion) asks for an assurance that one of the pertinent branches of the US government will provide all the assistance required to deliver the Alaska LNG project.

Lutnick is the boss of Cantor Fitzgerald. He could be a very useful intermediary for Glenfarne and the AGDC if confirmed due to his vast network of contacts on Wall St.

Personal opinion: the momentum gathering in support of the LNG project is becoming irresistible.

hTTps://x.com/SenDanSullivan/status/1884731192106160469

08:31

Farmer cringsing - not true.

1) Glenfarne is the AGDC partner which signed an exclusivity agreement. Was announced 10th January.

2) Update on core analysis from company. No firm guidance on timing. However the dates you mentioned should have seen flow testing commence so I think you need to check your source again.

See link below to Governor Dunleavy's State of the State Address last night. Stand out item on the agenda was the Alaska LNG Project. There were a couple of occasions where the name "Pantheon Resources" could have been inserted into his address. See if you can spot them!

hTTps://www.ktoo.org/video/gavel/governors-state-of-the-state-address-2025011034/?eventID=2025011034

01:00

What a silly thing to say, chrisev1. You know fine well the point was about values and ethics, do unto others what you would have them do to you via the example of the values you instill in your kids.

Grow up.

09:49

Hi overeager - yep, looks like the information you describe is also incoming. I don't have any specific volumes in mind about the three shallowest "bonus" zones discovered at Megrez-1. All I would say is that I'm very confident (upgraded from "pretty confident!") that the "wholly conventional" Ahpun East oilfield will comfortably exceed 1 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Bear in mind PANR is still to intersect TS2, TS4, TS5, TS6, TS7, TS8 (and maybe have another look around for TS9), plus learn more about the three shallowest "bonus" zones described in last week's RNS. Exciting times indeed. I contend, all else being equal, positive news on any of these stock-specific matters will be welcomed by the equity markets and the SP marked up.

18:11

Noted boom.boom. FWIW I agree entirely that *if* the Ahpun East reservoirs have broadly similar properties to those at Pikka and Willow, the SP will be well north of 100p.

15:05

Ayecuramba - answering your points in turn.

1) Your response was "Ok". That's it? You say you're a LT shareholder and yet you have zero curiosity about the deferred terms the SoA is offering 88E? You have zero concerns the SoA won't require delinquent lease fees be paid up in full prior to 88E securing more acreage in subsequent auctions? Maybe read my paragraph 1) again? There are two questions contained there. Another example of a forum member sticking his heads in the sand or too lazy to do the research?

2) Noted. You therefore appear content to accept via a second hand source that Burgundy is indeed on course for an IPO somewhere in North America. Happy to stipulate the 88E BoD is accurately relaying an undertaking made by Burgundy but where is the independent proof that steps towards an IPO are being made? Have you found a single piece of evidence confirming Burgundy is about to IPO? I can't find anything, can you? If 'reassuring Brom' had found any evidence you can be 100% sure he would have posted it here. Maybe re-read my paragraph 2). Another example of specific questions going unanswered quite deliberately by you and other forum members. When are you and other forum members going to acknowledge that refusing to address standard questions about 88E's investment case has done you no good whatsoever and that a new approach is required? I note you make no comment on the odds of another deferment from the mid-February deadline. Why is that? Head in sand syndrome again?

3) Another example of your refusal to answer any of the questions about the implications for 88E of non-payment of the next payment due to the Namibian partnership. Even if Burgundy pay 88E the outstanding US$3m, 88E has insufficient cash at hand to make the Stage 2 payment to Namibia. Once again, not a hint of curiosity about the implications for 88E shareholders as the company faces an impending hurdle.

4) Noted. And that's a perfectly reasonable position to take providing you admit to other forum members that you've accepted your continued involvement in 88E is all about hope rather than continually defending the fundamentals and point blank refusing to answer fact-based questions. For goodness sake, man, even reassuring Brom has adopted a fatalistic stance towards 88E. You've reached the stage of defending the indefensible. Your refusal to acknowledge the cold hard facts suggests you are trying to suck other punters into your investment. That's way out of order and something you should consider carefully. I don't know if you have kids (and of course it's none of my business) but are these really the values you would be happy teaching them? What if, some time in the future, your kids read the type of baseless content you continue to post on a public forum? Shameful.

4) I'd rather be well-research and long-winded than under-researched and see my investment go to zero pence. What a childish way of thinking when it comes to personal finance. Do better.

24/1 @ 15:25

Ayecuramba - I note the facts contained within your post.

1) Let's agree that G&A is now AU$3.5m (US$2.2m) per annum (wages plus corp costs). Does that include lease fees payable to the state of Alaska? I *think*, but am happy to be corrected, that the state of Alaska has allowed 88E to defer lease payments for a period of time, correct? I wonder if the SoA DNR will take a rather more rigorous view to late lease payments when they observe 88E buying more lease blocks at Leonis whilst being delinquent in their other leases?

2) It is far from clear whether Burgundy will be in a position to pay 88E the US$3m due in mid-February. Has anyone seen a single scrap of evidence of the long-mooted North American IPO of Burgundy Xploration? I can't find a single piece of evidence of same. Even Brom hasn't been able to reassure the forum that such an IPO is due to take place. Odds on another deferment whilst 88E and Burgundy await the NN's flow test results and hope they can use any associated attention on the region to permit them to raise more cash for more dilution?

3) If Burgundy pay the US$3m in mid-Feb, 88E will have US$7.55m of cash. If not, they'll have US$4.55m. Add in maybe US$0.75m of dividends from Longhorn per annum and deduct G&A costs of $US2.2m. Any forum member with a calculator is going to be left with the following question: 88E cannot pay the 2025 payment due to the Namibian partners of US$7.5m. If 88E cannot make the payment in full, what penalty (if any) will result? Even if there is no direct penalty, it will leave the Namibian partnership seeking external capital to fund the proposed drilling operations in 2026, correct? How will the Aussie/AIM/OTC market react if there is to be no drilling activity by 88e in Namibia until 2027? We already know there will be no drilling on 88E leases in Alaska until a partner or partners are secured to provide the necessary capital, leaving 88E with a tiny W.I. percentage in return for a free carry.

4) Final question is how can 88E's current mkt cap of >£23m be justified?

24/1 @ 11:23

andysmall - some fact checks for you, please. Qube has now gone below 0.5% short (0.42%). As a result, unless Qube *increases* its short back above 0.5%, Qube is no longer obliged to inform the FCA of its continuing short position, or indeed if they have closed out entirely. That's the first point.

Second point is that Qube is a quant fund. Whatever SP movement and associated volume first led to their "computer says yes" decision on Monday/Tuesday last week to open a short in PANR, the Wednesday RNS and market reaction thereafter will have taken a wrecking ball to that particular algorithm. I would be amazed if Qube still has a short position in PANR. By definition they're disinterested in fundamentals and accept that news events can blow their algos out the water from time to time. IMHO this is one of those events.

Oh, and Qube didn't "spot" anything fundamental about PANR's investment case, be it good or bad. They're a quant fund so SP, SP absolute movement, percentage movement, change and intensity of volume traded and many, many more data points are what concerns them. I'd be surprised if the trader who opened and closed the Qube position within a week could even point to Deadhorse on a map.

Mangrove is a different kettle of fish, however. They are stock pickers so they are definitely "taking a view". Personal opinion: if they do remain short 1% of PANR, I will be surprised if they run such a position over the course of the flow testing period. We know there will be a minimum of 4x 10 day flow tests and a noteworthy flow from just one of those intervals will likely be sufficient to blow their remaining short to smithereens. I just can't see them running that degree of risk in a conventional reservoir setting with the logs all supporting the investment required to flow test at least 4 intervals. If Mangrove hasn't already closed their short (and been tardy with their paperwork as they were in 2024) then IMHO I'd expect their position to move under 0.5% in the next couple of weeks or so.

I 100% agree with Chrsitof45. Mangrove's 1% short is de minimis in the overall scheme of things.

25/1 @ 22:55

Now, now boom.boom - don't be a d^ck. If you can post on this forum you are clearly capable of reading RNSs. In which case you will know fine well the CB is paid in the middle of Mar/June/Sept and Dec until the balance is paid off in full. The balance at time of writing is $14.7m. All else being equal, that's 6 quarters to go beginning in March '25 and finishing in June '26. Once again, de minimis when looking at a mkt cap of $700m.

Folk are asking what news is to come? Last RNS was termed "Preliminary" so a "Final Analysis" could be imminent? An RNS detailing the start of the flow test period and an approximate timetable? News if the flow tests are going to be extended to include the three extra shallower bonus zones? I contend that a positive announcement on any of those three subjects will the SP move up.

Governor Dunleavy's press conference complete with the bosses of AIDEA, AGDC and DNR.

Plenty of pertinent content, universally positive for the full Alaska LNG Project.

hTTps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEmfuL74-yU&t=2775s

Best Q&A on the gasline was at 54:00

Personal view: SP *should* move up well into the 50s, maybe higher in next couple of days. If it doesn't then it's a bargain IMHO.

Just watched the Bezinga interview with David Hobbs on YouTube. That was the delivery of a boss who is seeing evidence that his pre-drill guidance will have to be upgraded viz-a-viz volume of recoverable oil. Note how he didn't seek to depart from pre-drill guidance on reservoir properties, ref mention of permeability at Ahpun East.

As analysts in the City say, this stock is pregnant with upgrades. All else being equal, if the lab results come back supporting the sentiment as clearly conveyed in this interview, the value of PANR's equity is *should* rise, and rise materially.

Strong buy for me. Health warning: I added to my holding once again today.

H/t fordtin

I have picked out what seems to me to be the most relevant bits of the executive order, which you can find at -

hTTps://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-alaskas-extraordinary-resource-potential/

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to:

...

(d) prioritize the development of Alaska’s liquified natural gas (LNG) potential, including the sale and transportation of Alaskan LNG to other regions of the United States and allied nations within the Pacific region.

Sec. 3. Specific Agency Actions. (a) The heads of all executive departments and agencies, including but not limited to the Secretary of the Interior; the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and the Secretary of the Army acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Public Works, shall exercise all lawful authority and discretion available to them and take all necessary steps to:

...

(ii) prioritize the development of Alaska’s LNG potential, including the permitting of all necessary pipeline and export infrastructure related to the Alaska LNG Project, giving due consideration to the economic and national security benefits associated with such development.

(e) The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, under the direction of the Secretary of the Army, shall immediately review, revise, or rescind any agency action that may in any way hinder, slow or otherwise delay any critical project in the State of Alaska.

Scot126 - this is a huge tipping point for PANR's investment case. To have the weight of the Federal bureaucracy being instructed to facilitate the full Alaska LNG export project is excellent news for PANR and for the value of its equity. Anything the Federal govt can do to decrease the regulatory burden will shorten the timeline to first spades in the ground. In turn, this increases the probability stakeholders in the project will require categorical guarantees of PANR's capacity to deliver the gas as per the sales agreement = 500mmcf/d. If that means the SoA or an Alaskan/Japanese utility advancing capital to PANR to drill another couple of appraisal wells in return for free gas for the first 3/6/9/12 months of the airline's operations then that would be a fantastic outcome for PANR shareholders.

Acceleration of the gasline project improves PANR's NPV calculations.

All else being equal, PANR's equity has been substantially de-risked as a result of Trump's Executive Order overnight. The SP *should* move up on this news, especially if the US investment community becomes aware of PANR and it's asset base.

BBC lists early Executive Orders:

"National energy emergency"

"Trump will declare a national energy, he said in his inaugural address. Officials earlier said this would be designed to allow the US to produce more natural resources and jobs.

The new president also vowed to "drill, baby, drill" for more American fossil fuels. Officials have also said he will issue an order targeting Alaska's "incredible abundance of natural resources".

Fox News Digital has learned "Trump will fully unleash Alaskan energy," which the official described as essential to U.S. national security. The senior official told Fox News Digital that the energy executive order deals with "every single energy policy," and addresses liquid natural gas, ports, fracking, pipelines, permitting and more, while also terminating President Biden polices he said "have constrained U.S. energy supply."

Folks - I reckon there's a more than decent chance the Alaska LNG project will be greenlit by Trump in an Executive Order in the next 48 hours. I doubt PANR will be mentioned explicitly but for any of you who are comfortable using social media, the next 48 hours *could* provide PANR with its best opportunity yet to finally break through to the wider US investor community. Look lively.

PS Remember US markets are shut for Martin Luther King Day tomorrow.

The Alaskan delegation in Congress continues to advocate very actively for the Alaska LNG project. The latest example is Senator Murkowski's back and forth with Doug Burgum during his Senate confirmation hearing in front of the Energy Committee yesterday.

hTTps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFvGgfn9Gr8

Head to 1:42:15 and listen until 1:44:50. From afar, it most certainly does appear ludicrous that Alaska, of all places on the globe, finds itself looking at the possibility of importing LNG from Canada! Note, once again, how Alaskan leadership is pressing home the rationale for the LNG project to be constructed as it will also see US energy exported to US allies in the Pacific.

The drums continue to beat in favour of the gasline, and beat louder and louder IMO.

Something I'm looking into, fyi. If future legal challenges attempt to slow or prevent PANR's development and/or the gasline's construction, the Dept of the Interior is likely to be one of the main parties to any such action. I guess there is also the possibility that a resources-friendly Secretary of the Interior (Doug Burgum is the former Governor of North Dakota where 21% of the GDP comes from natural resources and mining) may instruct his Dept to accelerate the permitting and legal processes required for the LNG project to begin construction. Shortening such lead times would surely be beneficial to PANR and its NPV.

NB. The US markets are closed for Martin Luther King Day on Monday, 20th January.