Member Info for Scot126

16:31

That is true, Ayecuramba. But I cannot state this any more bluntly. David Hobbs (Exec Chairman of PANR) went on to say that, and I'm paraphrasing with some direct quotes too: ".....but for PANR this is effectively a free hit. Due to the relative locations, good news from Hickory-1 will be good news for PANR too....but bad news from Hickory-1 will not affect the data already collected from Talitha #A and thus there is no downside to PANR if there's bad news.

The PANR Exec Chairman confirmed that the stockmarket is currently valuing each PANR recoverable barrel in the ground at US10c. I will do the same calculation for 88E in the next 24-48 hours. If, and I repeat if, the stockmarket is currently valuing each 88E recoverable barrel in the ground (and assuming a full success case for the two flow tests at Hickory-1) at 10c or more then, solely on the fundamentals and maths, the answer is clear.

If the equivalent number for 88E is US10c or more then we need to be really clear and accepting of the fact that a) an 88E shareholder is relying on the casino crew on the OTC market to get involved again and/or b) the Namibian deal optionality is worth a fortune.

My thoughts?

a) no sign of the US OTC punters for the last 2 years. They've gone. Just read the posts on Twitter about 88E on the company's timeline.

b) A complete unknown, and I hope 88E has found a diamond of a deal in Namibia. but you're not going to know if that's the case for years and years. They're only shooting the 3D seismic this year after all.

.....less than 2 mins to register.

hTTps://x.com/InvestorMeetCo/status/1750156752371200307?s=20

Kever/Tom - time to listen to some proper experts.

Link below to the media company hosting today's webinar, due to begin @ 3.30pm. Takes

Link to the northern neighbour's webinar, due to begin at 3.30pm today. Takes less than 2 mins to sign up.

Buy, sell or hold either stock, there *will* be information on the shared asset.

hTTps://x.com/InvestorMeetCo/status/1750156752371200307?s=20

As forum users will recall from an earlier post, the BoD trailed in various webinars/interviews that they'd update shareholders in the New Year about the new leases secured in November '23. There's a healthy probability management are going to update us during the webinar starting at 3.30pm. Therefore I am keeping an eye out for an RNS any time from now until 3.30pm. As others have correctly stated, *If* management are going to relay their analysis of the new leases, that would be "new news" and thus requires to be RNS'd at or before the webinar begins.

Also look out for the AGM resolution vote results to be RNS'd also.

Peakybrum: I see you repeating this error so best I correct it so others don't adopt this misunderstanding. Whether the US market is open or shut does not affect ANY rules about the timing of company disclosures. The UK rules are the ONLY rules which govern the publication of any PANR news. I know you have a history with 88E where they have sought to be cute with the timing of ANNs/RNSs back in the Dave Wall days. PANR doesn't work that way, and nor should it. Hope that helps.

06:26

The rig travels at 1.5 - 2mph. The authorities shut the Dalton Highway to traffic and the rig convoy travels south. There may be opportunities for the rig to pull over at set intervals to allow other traffic to get past.

Guesstimate? About a day to a day and a half. There's an excellent website called Alaska 511 where you can read when traffic events (like a slow moving rig) shut the Dalton Highway.

Keep an eye out for the road closure notification and that'll give you a decent guide as to when operations will begin on the ice pad....perhaps 4-7 days after the rig arrives on location.

13:44

Lol, would that be counsel or council?!

As you say, different views but making the same overall point. Best.

14:04

Sorry, correction to post below: "In some cases, there is literally thousands of feet of differential in depths between an 88E location on the south and south-eastern portion of a shared reservoir and the northern or north-western portion of that same reservoir, but owned by PANR."

11:39

Hello again sharenovice22. Thanks for your post timed at 11.39am today. It was a brilliant post because it betrayed beautifully your lack of knowledge about the E&P sector.

"Not too sure how the oil quality can be too different between 88e and PANRs drills yet PANR benefit 4x on 88e's finding."

Listen up, sharenovice, because you're going to get an education. It's not the aerial distance between two locations which is the primary factor when establishing the variable characteristics of a reservoir. For the umpteenth time, Google "Dmax". Educate yourself about its implications. Then compare the relative depths of the portions of shared acreage that 88E and PANR owns. in some cases, there are literally thousands of differentials in depths between an 88E location on the south and south-eastern portion of a shared reservoir and the northern or north-western portion of that same reservoir, but owned by PANR.

Then Google "logarithmic". Depositional depth and compaction can lead to what, on the face of it, appear to be quite small variations in perm and porosity. We know that PANR's portion of the shared reservoirs are updip of 88E's and that Dmax calculations are therefore more favourable to PANR as a result. This is not a debating matter, sharenovice22. This is called established science.

Here's some homework for you. Let's just concentrate on the BFF, SFS and SMD. Go to the latest 88E and PANR presentations and look at the Technically Recoverable Resource P50 figure for those reservoirs for each company. You'll see that PANR's numbers are many multiples of those of 88E. I'd especially draw your attention to the BFF numbers for each company. When you compare these ***scale only*** numbers, can you see why I argue that on any given day I can only justify 88E's mkt cap being valued at a maximum of 1/7th of PANR's mkt cap?

If we then assess the qualitative differences (Dmax differential) then I can easily, and I do mean easily, see PANR being worth >10x, >20x, even >30x the value of 88E. Do remember that PANR recently informed the market that there are two zones within their acreage (one in Aphun and one in Zodiak) which qualify as "conventional" in character. The significance of this news has yet to be understood by the market, by PANR shareholders and by 88E shareholders.

Do the work, sharenovice22.

.

11:25

This is factually incorrect. The strategy to target the OFS firms to encourage their participation in PANR's Aphun project was only enunciated by the new Exec Chairman at some point in the summer of 2023. Accordingly Kever is once again deliberately misinforming this forum about an "on the record" strategy being executed by the PANR BoD. Prior to David Hobbs' redirecting strategy towards the OFS firms, you'd have to go back *over a decade* (and four drills and terabytes of new data later) to the days of Great Bear where Halliburton was a minor partner in the acreage. [4 or 8 blocks out of 60 or so, from memory. Happy to be corrected.]

Buy, sell or hold PANR but do not rely on Kever to post accurate or truthful content.

13:09

Hi contango - in a recent webinar Jay described the six parties in the dataroom as "the usual suspects". Looking at the OFS (oil field service) companies already active on the Slope I think it's fair to surmise the likes of Halliburton, Schlumberger, Nabors and Baker Hughes constitute 4 of the 6 companies to which Jay is referring. As I have learned, these companies will have their own in-house experts in each of the scientific fields required to assess the attraction of the PANR project.

The cost of these expert employees' time is what Jay was referring to when he said each of those companies is investing hundreds of thousands of dollars by entering the dataroom and assessing the data. Despite this being explained to Kever on numerous occasions he still doesn't understand this really simply *fact*. It must surely be clear to this forum by now that Kever has never been a business owner nor a manager who has to account for his reports' time within an overall dept budget. Yet still he expects folk to listen to his ill-educated nonsense?!

I guess the OFS companies might look to use external advisors when it comes to arranging finance and drawing up legal contracts? But even then, the sheer size of these companies means that they'll likely have most of that expertise in-house also. For example, one of my mates is a lawyer in the O&G industry working for a huge company. All he does is O&G contract work. I'm sure he uses external advisors when dealing with a project in an overseas domicile but with PANR's project being in Alaska, I'm going to guess the majority of legal/finance/regulation work will also be done in-house by these American companies. Hope that helps.

08.00

Yes, sharenovice22, albeit indirectly. Our southern neighbour, 88E, will be flow testing the SFS and SMD-B at Hickory-1 from mid-Feb onwards. Because PANR's portion of the shared reservoirs is updip of 88E's portion *and* due to the data sharing agreement in place between the two companies, this means the results of the flow tests will be at least as valuable to PANR as they are to 88E, very likely more so.

Why would that be, I hear you cry, sharenovice22?

Well, the thing is, if the SFS or SMD flows successfully at the Hickory-1 location then, due to the effects of Dmax, any such result will have a greater positive effect on PANR's valuation because the size (or scale) of the SFS and SMD is far larger on PANR's acreage than it is on 88E's land. Overlay the fact that PANR's reservoirs have superior qualitative characteristics due to the updip location and there's a leveraged positive effect to any successful flow test at Hickory-1 for PANR.

In the scenario described above, certainly successful flow tests would be good news for 88E but it would be good news x2, or good news x4 for PANR in terms of extrapolation of the data --> valuation uplift.

But what if the SFS and SMD flow tests are unsuccessful at Hickory-1? Undoubtedly that would be tough for 88E and they'd have to focus on Texas and Namibia. But what about the implications for PANR? Talitha-A is located very close to the southern border with 88E. The results from Talitha-A are already baked into PANR's strategy and valuation. PANR's *base case* has already *been* established by the data collected at Talitha-A. An unsuccessful result from Hickory-1, due to its downdip location and less favourable Dmax characteristics, would not have much (if any?) implications for PANR because it will not affect the results already achieved at Talitha-A.

So, sharenovice22, to summarise. I wish 88E all the luck in the world when flow testing the SFS and SMD-B. Success at Hickory-1 will have a leveraged effect on PANR 's valuation due to the larger scale and superior characteristics of the shared reservoirs on PANR's acreage v's that of 88E. A poor result from Hickory-1 ought not to have much, if any, effect on PANR because its base case has been established by the data already collected at Talitha-A. The effect of a poor result at Hickory-1 for 88E? You're an 88E shareholder.....I'm sure you can work it out.

Kever - still on about no-one being interested. We know at least six parties have signed NDAs to enter the PANR dataroom. So we can say categorically that there are at least 6 parties interested in the data - that's a fact. I note you have trouble understanding the concept of those parties investing hundreds of thousands of dollars to access the dataroom. Please enlighten this forum which oil service employers aren't paying the salaries of their geologists, reservoir engineers, civil engineers, seismic engines, etc? Dolt.

13:41

Hi Redbeardoil2 - I'm not aware of the Alaskan regulators prohibiting the use of plugs, as described by Gung ho. For example, PANR has used multiple plugs in multiple wells in Alaska.

Sure you can drill through plugs in the future to reach the deeper BFF horizon. Gung ho will be aware that before doing so the Alaskan regulators will wish to ensure the complete robustness of the well before permitting further activity. Furthermore, any subsequent flow test of the BFF cannot deliver completely accurate data due to pressure differentials up hole and intermingling of measurable hydrocarbons/water from shallower intervals. This procedure would also cost another few million bucks and another winter season (ice pad, ice road, etc, etc.).

12.19

Hi Gung ho - I note with thanks your very helpful description of the flow test procedure.

The trouble, as redbeardoil2 describes, is that 88E has elected not to flow test the deepest interval, being the Basin Floor Fan. [And the Kuparuk, but that's a different story.]

Certainly 88E will flow test the SFS and SMD-B (in that order, deeper to shallower as per your description of industry practice) but in so doing it means an *accurate* flow test of the BFF in the Hickory-1 hole can never be undertaken in the future.

Thus redbeardoil2 makes the entirely reasonable point that 88E will have invested c.$30m in the Hickory-1 well without collecting vital data from the BFF zone, which remember has been identified as the interval with the largest potential recoverable resource. He goes on to ask another perfectly reasonable question. Why is it 88E decided not to flow test their largest reservoir? Redbeardoil2 suspects that 88E management has intentionally avoided flow testing the BFF because they fear a poor result due to Dmax considerations.

I join redbeardoil2 in sharing that suspicion. I also suspect the Talitha data shared with 88E will have alerted 88E management to the *relatively* low likelihood of a decent flow test result on the BFF at Hickory-1.

To be clear, I wish 88E massive success when flow testing the SFS and SMD-B intervals. But I warn all members of this forum the following. ***Even if*** the SFS and SMD-B flow tests are a *complete success* the way the market is currently valuing PANR's far larger and far higher quality contingent resources means that 88E will be valued (on fundamentals) at a *lower* mkt cap than it enjoys today.

Redbeardoil2 has issued a blunt warning. He's a shareholder. The forum should start taking his concerns seriously and to ask the same questions he has done IMHO.

Indeed Tony. And how would 88E go about flow testing the deeper BFF with any degree of accuracy when production of hydrocarbons would forever more be an unknown mix from all intervals in the vertical hole?

From the other place.

"Canaccord, Pantheon’s broker, has come out with its Top 6 small and mid/cap picks in the Oil & Gas sector for Q1. PANR is one of these and the comment is: “Very large well-placed Alaskan oil resources, though still more to do technically and in terms of development financing.” The unrisked price target is 248p and the risked at 86p.

I don’t recall the analyst having Pantheon as a top pick before."

Also, the lse moderators deleted my earlier post about reporting K e v e r. It won't happen immediately but eventually lse will lose the goodwill of users if they can't discern between posters with differing viewpoints and those posters whose content amounts to criminality. It's a real pity.

15:47

Yep, have a read of the plans for Longhorn. It's described in there. Happy to help.

01:37

Hi Danno01 - if your post is genuine, and I have my doubts I must be honest, then you need to read the RNSs throughout 2023 and listen/watch the webinars conducted by the BoD throughout the year. That way you will learn all about the flow data at Alkaid-2 and Aphun more widely.

Looking at Kodiak, there are plenty of flow test data points contained in historical RNSs for Talitha #A and Theta West-1. If you have indeed been "in and out over the last 18 months" I must admit I'm very surprised you haven't been aware of these formally declared FACTS. Good luck with your research.

22:34

Kever - thought you claimed you had never put on a short position? Another lie.

The lie that we all witnessed was your criminal dissemination of false and misleading information when, on Dec 9th, you informed a public forum that a highly discounted fund raise was happening in the City at that very moment. That was by far and away the most obvious lie you have published.

Of course these lies have been followed by the whole WH Ireland research note....then it was a sector note....then it was a phone call with your broker at WHI. Just lately you've told us that it's WHI's formal position to expect PANR to undertake a "massively dilutionary fundraise paid for by the shareholders." I presume this is you referring to the $120m (NB not $150m as you continuously and dishonestly state despite multiple fact checks and corrections) required to get to Aphun self-financing.

I know this to be a lie. The reason I know this is a lie is because I know the O&G analyst at WHI. I've been in touch with him and, CATEGORICALLY, this is NOT incorporated into his forecasts nor financial model.

What this means everybody, is further proof that Kever is a liar. His conduct reaches and exceeds the level required to amount to criminal conduct, "disseminating (publishing on a public forum) false and misleading information designed to create a false market in the securities of Pantheon Resources.

Please everyone - buy, sell or hold PANR shares but do not pay a second's notice to the content of proven liar, Kever. We must not let this criminal conduct spoil the forum. I beseech fellow lse members to mass report this liar until either he gets distracted and moves along or until the lse moderators finally take their responsibilities seriously.

08:53

Yes, no probs doing that, Baxi44.

Kever - you are factually wrong once again. It is factually incorrect to say that no+ine has been interested in partnering PANR. In Q4 '21 a potential farminee made a 3-staged offer totalling US$1bn for a significant minority stake in the project. Contracts were drawn up ready for execution. The external party's technical team had completed their due diligence. This has all been confirmed on the record by PANR BoD. Fact.

Of course the contract was not executed. That is also a fact. But you simply cannot state truthfully that no-one has been interested in the asset. That is called a lie.

You keep lying, Kever, and I'll keep correcting you. An easy way to shut me up is for you to stop disseminating false and misleading information in order to create a false market in PANR shares. It's a really simple rule to follow for the ethical poster.