We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
[Part 2, continued from Part 1 below]
Cash at hand.
More sophistry from 88E. Cash at hand on 31/3/24 was US$11.3m (AU$17.5m). The outstanding amount due to be paid for the Hickory-1 operations is US$11.6m (US$2.9m already paid). I fully accept that, on the face of it, Burgundy’s share of the total costs for this season is US$3.625m. But here’s some information that is really, really, really important for forum members to understand.
1) As the operator, 88E carries the legal responsibility to pay the Hickory-1 bills in full. If they stiff the contractors in Alaska, it’s a small population and good luck finding anyone to work for 88E in Alaska ever again.
2) If Burgundy doesn’t like the look of the data from the flow tests (and why would they?) then they can simply walk away from the project and their working interest reverts back to 88E. NB NB NB In walking away, Burgundy would not be paying 88E US$3.625m and 88E ***would have to pay the full gross costs of the Hickory-1 bills***.
My *opinion* is that there’s not a chance in hell Burgundy will pay 88E US$3.625m by the end of June ‘24, when 88E inform us they expect to settle the outstanding bills. I guess there is a small possibility Burgundy will pay some or all of the US$3.625m once the comprehensive analysis of the flow test data has been completed. However, examining Burgundy’s historical conduct, they only paid the final tranche of the outstanding balance of their share of the cost of *drilling* Hickory-1 in February ’24! Even in the unlikely scenario where Burgundy does end up paying 88E its share of the 2024 costs in H2’24 or H1’25, in the meantime 88E’s short term cashflow suggests the company looks to be in significant trouble.
Put even more bluntly, if Burgundy doesn’t pay 88E some cash in the next ten weeks and 88E pays all its Hickory-1 contractors on time, then 88E will have no cash left until it receives a Q2 dividend from Longhorn. There won’t be any cash to pay salaries and other essential items. The business will, in effect, be insolvent.
I will examine 88E’s outgoing commitments in a future post.
[End of Part 2, see above for Part 3]
These posts contain important information and analysis, and should be taken very seriously indeed.
The arrival of the Q1 Report overnight was excellent timing for anyone interested in the *facts* of the 88E investment case. Taximan57 was either incapable or unwilling to work out the revenue associated with 88E's share of Longhorn's production so, being the generous guy I am, I thought I'd take a moment to work it out for him.
Guidance from the Q1 Report informs us that Longhorn gross production for Q1 was 328boepd = 328 barrels of oil equivalent per day. We know 88E’s Working Interest (W.I.) in Longhorn is 64%, so that equates to 210boepd attributable to 88E. Ok, so far?
We were also informed the ratio of oil to gas was 62% oil, 38% gas (down from 70% oil when 88E initially acquired its interest in Longhorn in Feb’22…hmmm…..). Using POO of US$85 and gas price of $US3.00 per MMBtu, that equates to revenue to 88E of US$12,504 per day from 88E’s 64% W.I. => US$1,140,990 for the quarter. Once again, ok so far?
Out of that production revenue attributable to 88E, we must deduct: 88E’s share of opex; 88E’s share of Texas royalties payable; 88E’s share of local taxes; 88E’s fee to the operator for running the asset. We know 88E received US$451k (AU$700k) from Longhorn for the quarter. Quite a few deductions from the headline revenue figure, eh?
If Longhorn was performing as originally guided in Feb ’22 (c.600boepd gross production, 70% oil), 88E should have been paid a Q1’24 dividend of c.US$1m. Instead, 88E has invested c.$US15m in Longhorn which is 50% more than originally budgeted, with a further potential investment of US$3m to come in H2’24. At time of writing, and very roughly, 88E management has gone 50% over budget on Longhorn and despite that is receiving 50% less dividend income. Is anyone in this forum prepared to voice their concern at this point?
Let me be crystal clear. The income from Texas might just about cover G&A and maybe some annual lease fees. If you read the above and still hope Longhorn will make a dent in the cost of 88E’s planned exploration activities then you cannot do maths.
[Part 1, see above for Part 2]
06:50
Quite right, DrMicho. I also think "funding news will be released soon." After the 2 inbound IERs on the Ahpun Topset and Alkaid ZOI we could hear about a vendor finance deal signed with a "large" OFS firm.
Then we could all be reading about the Alaskan gas pipeline where PANR has already agreed terms with the AGDC for a long term (20 years?) take or pay arrangement. If the pipeline is given the go ahead, and the Governor of Alaska certainly believes it will happen telling CNBC to expect news in the next couple of months, then the SoA/AGDC/Alaskan utility cos will act as guarantor/arranger of a facility with an Alaska bank for up to $250m.
Exciting, isn't it, DrMicho? Question for you. Say PANR closes at 35p on the afternoon of Day 1. At 7am on Day 2 there's an RNS confirming the pipeline has been given the go ahead. Do you reckon PANR will a) double or b) treble in price by the end of Day 2? Could you imagine being short on the morning of Day 2? Could you imagine having no exposure to PANR's investment case on the morning of Day 2? But that's what you're advocating, DrMicho.
Yikes.
23:05
Why Richar? Give the forum one honest, truthful reason why olderwiser should be banned from this forum? Has he spread false or misleading information? Nope, exactly the opposite is the case
Listen up, Richar. Just because you do not *enjoy* reading the facts of the investment case of a stock in which you have freely elected to invest *does not* mean the author should be banned.
Where is your righteous indignation at the multiple prolific posters on this forum who would have you believe the flow test results were good (they weren't); that the company isn't running out of cash in the next few weeks (it is); that the downdip portion of these shared reservoirs is the superior location (it isn't); that it's no big deal the 88E executive team hasn't invested a single dollar in the company's shares (it is a big deal in listed small caps); that it's no big deal the MD *elected' to take his bonus in cash rather than shares (it is a big deal); that it's no big deal the Board permitted the executive employee(s) to sell their performance rights in early 2024 (it is a big deal); that the company is being fully transparent with its shareholders and the wider market (it isn't, otherwise they would have issued a correction RNS); that Longhorn is performing well and will be a substantial contributor to 88E's future exploration costs (it isn't performing as planned and it won't be contributing to anything other than management's salaries); that it's no big deal if Burgundy Xploration defaults (it is a big deal); that 88E is undervalued in absolute terms (it isn't) or that 88E is undervalued v's PANR (it definitely isn't); that there is some great conspiracy involving a boiler room and market makers who are stealing your money (there isn't a conspiracy and I am not stealing your money....I was literally begging forum members to google Dmax and updip/downdip for months and months) .........those are the folk you should be screaming about, not the fundamental investors/analysts who have spent hundreds of hours researching the asset and analysing the two companies.
Grow up Richar. You're an adult, yes? Then put your big boy pants on and accept responsibility for your decisions. Oh, and contact the Chairman of 88E to ask for full transparency around the flow test data and whether the company is insolvent.
And quit abusing people online. It's classless.
19:50
Taximan57 - do you mean something like stock being held in escrow by a law firm or a bank? If that's the scenario you have in mind then I would have thought the shares would be held in the law firm or bank's nominee account.
There's no such thing as a Texas BOE. How can you post on this thread with such confidence when you don't know something as simple as this? Seriously?
Look up 88E's guidance on oil:gas ratio produced. Yes, such guidance exists....do the research. Dead easy to find. Think Google how much gas equates to a US barrel of oil. Then do some maths.
18:42
Taximan57 - this isn't like you. That post timed at 18:42 is a bare-faced lie. For goodness sake, Taximan57, It's right there in the new presentation pack.
1) 88E is targeting GROSS production from Longhorn of 600-675boepd by the end of 2024. Two questions, Taximan57.
- a) What's 88E's percentage ownership of the Texas assets? It's not 100%, it's 64%.
- b) There's a big difference in dollar value between a barrel of oil and a barrel of oil equivalent. Do you know that,
Taximan57? What's the guided ratio of oil:gas contained within those Texas barrels? You need to look that up and
work out the value of 88E's 64% share of the production of 600-675 boEpd and revert back to us. I suggest you
withdraw your post so you don't un/intentionally misinform your fellow forum members.
2) Do you think it's acceptabel for you to misrepresent 88E's management's formal guidance. I quote: "Net 88E cashflows
of c.US$3m expected in 2024, provide funds towards exploration and appraisal."
Yet more obfuscation from 88E management. Will c.US$3m dividend from Texas cover 88E's G&A/lease payments/listing costs/travel/office rent? Will it leave anything for future operations if 88E has to pick up the tab for a defaulting Burgundy?
No, thought not. This forum has got to do better. Have whatever hopes and dreams you heart desires but for goodness sake, the facts are right there in the presentation pack today.
18:12 and 18:23
Ayecuramba & chrisev1 - infantile rudeness as usual. Tiresome but you do you.
- Do either of you calculate 88E is, or will shortly be, insolvent?
- Do either of you assess the flow test data points to commerciality being declared?
- Do either of you believe a downdip, lower classification 88E barrel in the ground should be valued by the stockmarket at a premium to an updip, higher classification PANR barrel in the ground?
- Do either of you feel it's time to ponder why Ashely Gilbert didn't support the fundraise at 0.23p in Q4'23?
- *If* it turns out Ashley Gilbert and other 88E employees sold £200k worth of performance rights in January '24, will both of you be a) furious b) shocked and furious c) shocked and furious and rushing to contact the Chairman to ask what the hell is going on d) think everything is groovy and it's all the fault of an imaginary gang of boiler room scoundrels working with their market maker mates?
I hope and trust a large number of forum members acknowledge that, whilst they might dislike reading my posts, they acknowledge that I don't seed the forum with lies or made up fantasies. I'm addressing those folk now.
I "get" that some 88E shareholders think 'revenge' when they see the names scot126, olderwiser, rabito79 and others. Some have started posting lies and made up gibberish on PANR forums. Thus I am compelled to point out the following in the starkest of terms.
I fear 88E is insolvent or is about to become insolvent. The only way IMO to stave off insolvency in the very short term is to raise fresh equity capital. If such a cash raise is being considered, it will not be at 0.21p. It will have to be priced at a sufficient discount to attract new capital who will see that the Hickory-1 flow test data doesn't look too clever. There's also the impending vote on consolidation to consider.
I assess that 88E has drilled its final well in Alaska as operator. 88E needs to recapitalise itself and Namibia will become the primary narrative on which the investment case will be reconstructed. That's if the company survives this current cash crunch.
Net, net, net? A fundraise is, IMHO, heading your way. It will be done at a steep discount IMHO. Your Alaskan assets will be diluted massively.
If you like these Alaskan assets, the market is offering you a mathematically bizarre opportunity to swap your exposure to the same asset by selling a lower quality 88E barrel for 16.4p and buying a higher quality PANR barrel in the same formation for 14.5p. For those fundamental investors who remain here, this strategy offers the best mathematical option to see your knowledge of the Alaskan assets rewarded.
I would not have posted this content in such a blunt fashion had it not been for the guys spreading made up nonsense and straight out lies on other forums. I don't lie for my own financial benefit. I find it contemptible to do so. I haven't done it on this forum, you know that. Make of this what
[Part 3, continued from part 2 below]
There is no market maker conspiracy. The market makers don’t have enough capital to play the character of the evil puppet master hiding behind the curtain moving the share price like a pawn on a financial chess board. I’d be surprised if they’re permitted to apply much more than £20k of their firm’s capital on 88E at any one time. Please accept the fact the SP is where it is because a large number of your fellow shareholders around the world have read the results, interpreted them, digested them, accepted them….and then decided to sell all or part of their holding. As for buyers? If they’ve done a little reading and worked out the company is worryingly low in cash…..well, why wouldn’t they wait on the sidelines until that matter is addressed by the BoD?
I hope this post has assisted some of you. /end
[Part 3, continued from Part 2 below]
[Part 2, continued from Part 1 below]
The flow test results are what they are. I fully appreciate they're disappointing to shareholders but denying their veracity or refusing to acknowledge the facts are not going to help anyone, or the company for that matter.
This point is a tad more esoteric. Clear your minds for a moment....be prepared to consider a theory which you possibly hadn't been prepared to countenance until now.
Ok, the SP today isn't wrong or a conspiracy by market makers or the results of a nasty short attack by evil posters like scot126. No, the SP was actually wrong ***BEFORE*** Hickory-1 was drilled, ***BEFORE*** before Hickory-1 was flow tested. How so? Ever since the Dave Wall days and the US OTC punter tsunami of 2021 88E’s stockmarket valuation has contained a large and wholly irrational speculative element caused by a shareholder base which is, ON AVERAGE, disinterested in the fundamentals of the 88E investment case. Whether forum members like it or not, the science is incontestable. PANR’s volume *and* quality of oil in the shared reservoirs is at least 8-10x greater in scale ***and*** the quality of those barrel is higher (better perm and porosity, producibility, shallower, lower Dmax => classed as commercial). To my astonishment, a downdip lower classification 88E barrel at Phoenix is still, *even after* the flow test results, trading at a mathematically unjustified premium to a fully diluted, updip, higher classification PANR barrel in the ground.
Please don’t cry out in fury and wish my family ill-health and all that horrible stuff. The 88E mkt cap was irrational back in 2021, it was irrational before the flow tests started and it’s completely ludicrous now we know the results and the company’s cash position.
Keep the open mind a little longer please. If you bought 88E shares above 0.21p, then it was *your purchase* which was irrational. It was *your purchase* where you (unwittingly?) paid for a share with an unjustified speculative element contained within it which was completely divorced from the fundamentals of the investment case. Once you acknowledge it was the *purchase price* where you made an error it becomes far easier to acknowledge the market’s reaction to the flow test results.
The flow test results forced a large number of 88E shareholders to confront head on some facts which they had either *hoped* would never arrive; or had feared would arrive but shoved their head in the ground; or had miscalculated badly the risk of these results if they had attempted to analyse the potential outcomes in advance of the operations.
[Part 2, see above for Part 3]
The cash at hand on 31/3/24 was AU$17.5m or US$11.3m. 88E informs us the gross cost of this winter's operations at Hickory-1 is US$14.5m. 88E's share of the costs (c.75%) is US$10.9m. If Burgundy assess the flow test results are poor, they will default on their 25% share of the costs. People will recall the difficulty Burgundy had in sourcing finance for their share of *drilling* Hickory-1 last year. The final instalment from Burgundy *for last season's costs* only arrived in mid-February '24. My *opinion* at time of writing is that it is a probability Burgundy will default on their 25% share of the flow test costs and their 25% share of the Working Interest will revert back to 88E.
88E, as the operator, is contractually responsible for paying the full gross cost of US$14.5m. 88E management has unhelpfully (but unsurprisingly) not informed shareholders how much, if any, of the US$14.5m bill has been paid by the 88E to the contractors in Alaska. Very simple maths suggests 88E are today looking into the face of insolvency.
Why hasn't a member of this forum itemised 88E's future financial commitments for the next 6, 12, 24 months? What's the G&A in the period? What are the lease payments? What has 88E committed to invest into the Namibian project, and when is the deadline for payment? Yes, there's a US$5m debt facility in Texas but has anyone confirmed with 88E management whether Longhorn may only draw on it for capex costs related to the workover program or to fund the two new wells?
And after all those perfectly reasonable questions of fact listed above, there are still posters on here urging forum members to hoover up the shares???? These posters know fine well what is coming down the tracks towards shareholders. Their behaviour is highly questionable.
sharebel is possibly the most prolific on this forum when it comes to repeating, ad nauseam, the cultish chant that the flow tests results were positive, great, excellent, good news, etc, etc. This is anti-science gibberish. If sharebel and others were correct, 88E would have issued a correction saying the stk barrel figures were typos. Or their NOMAD would have forced them to issue a correction. Or they would have devoted a slide in their presentation deck to taking shareholders through the results in easy to follow tiny steps. What's been issued by the company or NOMAD? Nothing. Nothing.
[Part 1, see above for Part 2]
11.10
Redirons and Ausnsw - that is what's called a lie. I have not filtered anyone on lse. There are two reasons for this. The first is that I do not know how to filter someone on this website. The second is that I read every post on this forum.
Moving on to far more important matters. The cash at hand on 31/3/24 was AU$17.5m or US$11.3m. 88E informs us the gross cost of the winter's operations at Hickory-1 is US$14.5m. 88E's share of the costs (c.75%) is US$10.9m.
However, and this is really important, 88E is the designated operator at Hickory. As such, they are responsible for settling all the bills for the operations. They will then approach their non-operator partner, Burgundy Xploration, for their share of the costs (US$3.6m). It took around a year for Burgundy to settle its dues after Hickory-1 was drilled in Q1 2023. It was blatantly obvious Burgundy had difficulty sourcing finance in that instance. Bearing in mind the results of the two flow tests, there has to be a serious possibility (probability?) Burgundy will default on its 25% shares of this season's costs.
Burgundy are entitled to the full data package from the Hickory-1 flow tests. *If* Burgundy also assess the results are disappointing then they can inform 88E of their intention to default. In so doing, Burgundy will then give up their share of the working interest in the leases, which revert back to 88E.
But look at the maths. Most unhelpfully, 88E has obfuscated once again. The slide pack does not inform shareholders if the cash at hand is before it has paid its contractors any money this season. Has it paid some invoices or none at all?
If 88E is still to pay the full gross amount of US$14.5m then, unless Longhorn has had record production in Q1'24 and kicked in a super-sized dividend, there is a genuine fear 88E is, or will shortly be, insolvent.
There is little point ignoring this situation. I suggest UK/Aussie shareholders contact 88E's chairman to confirm the company's cash position.
*If* the scenario above is half way accurate then forum members must ask themselves how 88E plans to finance its commitments to the Namibia project. How will it pay its lease costs. How will 88E pay salaries and listing costs?
There's normally a very limited list of imminent actions a company can take if the above scenario is accurate.
88E is overvalued at the current SP IMO. Sharebel and others scream that's not true. Ok then, sharebel, where's your SOTP analysis of 88E? Stop playing the man, do some proper research and analysis, and tell the forum why the current mkt cap is justified? Also, tell the forum how 88E is going to pay its bills? Does 88E have enough cash to keep going?
Less abuse, more research.
10:44
Here's another silly fellow. Silly Stas has trouble reading, listening and understanding. Silly Stas thinks the $250m he heard about in the webinar was the *required* amount to move PANR to FID and a self-financing Ahpun development. Silly Stas, despite it being explained to him in detail yesterday, doesn't realise that *If* the Alaska gas pipeline goes ahead, $250m would be the approx size of the facility the SoA/AGDC/utilicos would guarantee/arrange for PANR to draw on to move its project forward. Silly Stas doesn't understand the difference between "modelled amount required for FID" and "size of bank facility made available to PANR *If* the gas pipeline gets the go ahead". What a silly Stas.
Silly Stas then compounds his error by using the $250m figure to dream up some fantasy corporate activity. Silly Stas has forgotten all about the vendor finance negotiations with a "large" OFS firm, where the OFS firm is waiting for the 2x IERs on Ahpun due imminently. Silly Stas also thinks he knows more than the Governor of Alaska about the proposed gas pipeline deal. Silly Stas has ignored entirely the terms of the recent agreement between PANR and the AGDC which described a gas deal which, *if* the gas pipeline goes ahead, would see revenue to PANR from gas sales alone of $500k per day.
Silly Stas is lashing out because he's angry. Silly Stas would be better using his time to work out if, after 88E pays for this winter's operations at Hickory-1, whether 88E will be insolvent. Silly Stas publicly posts that 88E's troubles are down to evil PANR shareholders when, in his heart, he fears it's because he didn't do enough research on the geology of Project Phoenix despite being urged to do so for years.
Silly Stas is being silly and isn't taking responsibility for his decision to invest in a listed company. Don't be like silly Stas.
09:51
Silly darientaylor thinks PANR produces 200bopd. Silly darientaylor doesn't know PANR is not in production. Silly darientaylor said he was looking at the numbers. Silly darientaylor is just making stuff up. Silly darientaylor is a liar. Don't be like silly darientaylor.
- Beautiful looking slides, no question about that.
- No confirmation of commerciality. Producability does not equal commerciality. Crucial analysis to follow.
- No correction or explanation of alleged typos on volume of oil collected. USFS = 24 stk barrels, SMD = 4 stk barrels. Anyone holding on to the hope these were typos or that a reassuring explanation for these figures was on its way must now accept the central message from the two flow tests. It is time to confront the reality that the effects of Dmax on these downdip portions of the reservoirs are looking consequential and worrisome.
-Cash at hand is AU17.5m (US$11.2m) as at 31/3/24. The gross cost of the operations at Hickory-1, as advised by 88E, was US$14.5m. The slide, unhelpfully, does not explain whether 88E has paid any Hickory-1 flow test invoices as of that date. I strongly urge forum members to consider whether Burgundy are likely to deliver the cash to 88E as per their partnership agreement. If they decide the results don't justify any further investment (and keep in mind the difficulty they patently had in sourcing the cash to pay for their share of the *drilling* costs from 2023) then 88E are operating on fumes today. If 88E received a dividend from Longhorn in Q1, I calculate 88E *might* have about US$1m after they pay for the winter operations. If Burgundy aren't in a position to deliver on their contribution (25% of US$14.5m) then 88E as operator will be expected to pay all the bills. I very much fear 88E are about to, or already have, run out of cash. You all know what comes next. I'll leave it at that.
23:03
Sharebel - kindly stop abusing me. I am not a member of a "boiler room". I do not publish false or misleading information. Point to one instance where I have done so. You can't because I don't post falsehoods. Why would I? It's dishonest to do so.
Sharebel - I can only imagine how angry you must be with other posters who continuously post false information. I'll give you a concrete example. What about all the posters on this forum who insist the USFS and the SMD have be3en labelled commercial discoveries? This despite the ***fact*** the last two RNSs did not make that statement at any time.
Please help stop the misinformation.
Ok, time to update the comparative valuations after 88E published the results from the two flow tests of the USFS and SMD at Hickory-1.
Assumptions:
cable 1.243
USFS CoS = 50%
SMD CoS = 81%
BFF = 102mmbo
[I am using 88E management's guidance on the pre-flow tests CoS. At best the results are ambiguous. I *suspect* there will be downgrades to follow but I'm going to keep the P50 volume estimates and the same CoS, despite "success" being questionable.]
Value of Texas - £6.3m, Namibia - £2.4m, Leonis - £1m
88E SP = 0.21p
PANR SP = 33.75p
CB size = US$27m
Each downdip, lower classification 88E Phoenix recoverable barrel in the ground is today valued by the equity markets at 16.75p.
Each updip, higher classification PANR barrel in the ground is today valued by the equity markets at 14.2p.
After the two flow test results from Hickory-1, I confess I find the fact an 88E barrel is still valued at a premium to a commercial PANR barrel to be perplexing. My *opinion* is that 88E is looking at fairly significant downgrades. If those downgrades do indeed arrive then this value disparity will become even more pronounced than it is now.
I'll look at the revised 88E cash position tomorrow and revert.
20:43
Indeed Triumph1. To help you out with this conundrum of yours, here's (hopefully) a decent summary of the PANR BoD's guidance on exactly this issue. This info was contained in recent RNSs and webinars, all freely available for you to access.
1) Vendor finance; quite a simple deal if executed. The vendor, described as a "large" OFS firm agrees to provide, for example in this post, drilling services (kit and personnel maybe?) to the amount of US$XXX. I think the latest guidance was that "negotiations are live". That's it.....reporting accurately. No exaggeration, no making stuff up, no gilding the lily...88E should try it some time. We were also informed about the prime motivation for retaining Lee Keeling and Cawley Gillespie to complete IERs on the Ahpun ZOI and Topset (Alkaid ZOI and SMD as was) rather than waiting for the end of Q2'24 for NSAI's report to be completed. It was due to the large OFS firm looking forward to receiving the independent conclusions of both firms before signing as deal (hopefully). Interestingly, I've done a bit of digging. Both PANR and 88E know of Lee Keeling as we've read the conclusions of their IERs previously. Cawley Gillespie is used by Hilcorp for some of their Alaskan work. Lee Keeling, of course, was originally referred to Great Bear by Halliburton. I'm sure you didn't know that, so have that one on me.
2) The guidance on the potential gas pipeline is as follows. Have a read of the RNS dated 28/3/24 first of all. To give you an idea of potential daily revenue *if* the gas is sold at that contract price, it's about $500k per day. Useful, eh? We were also told that PANR's gas is very low in CO2 which is an attractive/required characteristic for the pipeline. Timing? Exec Chairman thought there'd be news by the end of Q2'24. If you listen to a couple of interviews given by Gov Dunleavy in the last couple of weeks (CNBC and CERAWeek) he also talks about "in the next couple of months we'll hopefully have some news about the pipeline."
Structure. Happy to be corrected but here's my understanding from listening to the webinar. In return for PANR signing a long term (20 year?) take or pay contract, the SoA/AGDC/Alaskan utilicos will act as guarantor or arranger of a finance facility of *up to* $250m from which PANR may draw on to move the project forward. Please be aware (unlike Stas20) that formal guidance is for a maximum of $120m being required to arrive at Ahpun FID and to secure a self-financing model for Ahpun.
Remember all this can happen because PANR has already classed its Ahpun and Kodiak assets as ***commercial*** following the collection of data from 6 GB/PANR wells and other historic wells such as PS1. It took 14 years and hundreds of millions of dollars to reach this data threshold => declaring commerciality. I look forward to reading how 88E plans to continue that journey.
Let's diarise to review this strategy at the end of June, ok?
18:45
Thanks for swinging by, MadEnglish. Please note that at no time has olderwiser, Rabito79 or I posted infantile drivel like "Get out now" or "Sell your PANR while you can". Nope, we provide fact checks and corrections, and calculations with full working. Unlike so many on the 88E forum, we also provide citations and sources for out statements.
Tell you a funny story which happened earlier today. You'll double over laughing! One of the 88E posters reported a poster called MunnieTorx for stating that Hickory-1 was being P&A'd. He was furious, demanding a source for MunnieTork's statement. Wait 'til you here this.....I was able to copy and paste a sentence from 88E's RNS dated 15/4/24 where 88E management itself informed the market it was P&Aing Hickory-1. Tough market when shareholders can't even be bothered reading their own RNSs, eh?
Now that you're here, I have a couple of questions for you. What do you calculate 88E's cash at hand will be at the end of April after they pay for this season's operations? Also, do you think there is even the slightest chance Burgundy will pony up their share of this season's costs?
Don't forget to reply to the questions next time you're tempted to swing by!
18:25
For goodness sake, Ayecarumba, you must have lost count of the number of times I've stated I am here for price discovery. No more, no less. When have I ever lied or obfuscated about that? When? Name one occasion? Grrrr.....really????
17:47
MadEnglish - fact check? False.
- I'm not laughing at anyone losing money. Kindly refer the forum to a post where I have done so? You won't be able to do that because no such post exists. Fact.
- I have not persuaded a single 88E shareholder to sell 88E, not one. I am not licensed to give advice so I don't do that. I do, however, post my calculations of the irrational disparity in comparative valuations between 88E and PANR. What readers of that content opt to do with those calculations, showing all working, is up to them. Fact.
- Wrong metaphor entirely, describing me as being the equivalent of a religious extremist. But let's stick with that image of a religious extremist, MadEnglish. Religion relies heavily on faith, on hope with little or no empirical evidence to offer tangible support or proof for the deity of that religion. So, too, many members of this forum are full of hopium and are wilfully disinterested in the fundamentals, the hard data, the facts surrounding their investment in 88E.