Member Info for Scot126

Hmmmm.......I wonder what comes next? Answers on a postcard please! Lol

20:29
I'm talking about the agreement by 88E to license SAE's 3D seismic data on Icewine East. That's all I've ever been talking about. I don't understand what you're talking about?

grzesiek - your definition of "initial" is obviously very different from that of mine and Olderwiser. As for the old "service provider paid in 88E shares" trope, surely after the last two winters at Merlin-1 and Merlin-2 the days where members of the 88E cult trot out that refrain are long gone???? Dear oh dear. You have *got* to be joking me. Jesus wept.

19:30
Ok chrisev1, keep your head buried in the ground.

For other readers of this forum have a read of the words quoted directly from 88E RNSs and Qtrly Reports.

1) What is the ***full*** payment to SAE for the 3D seismic data? 88E shareholders will have noted the $1m payment in shares in the original RNS but, as described, that was only a part payment. The Q2 financial report confirmed a *further cash payment of $2m* to SAE, the seismic data provider. Is the cash license fee $2m a month, $2m a quarter, $2m every 6 months, $2m per annum or what? Bear in mind PANR/GB invested $80m in shooting 3D seismic, resulting in the largest 3D seismic package in Alaska. Surely c.$3m to license the data from SAE seems, on the face of it, an incredibly low price to pay? Also note the language: "Upfront license fee ***includes***, as ***part*** of the ***initial*** payment, US$1.0M in new 88E shares."

It's all there in black'n'white. You don't have to believe Scot126, just read the facts for yourselves!!!!

17:59
And the ***TOTAL*** cost of obtaining the 3D seismic for Icewine East, Brom? Management are hiding the total cost from shareholders, aren't they Brom? Why is that?

Not even this forum's most prolific poster believes the total cost to 88E is a mere $3m? Go on, ask him directly. Ask the company directly? Shareholders are ***entitled*** to know the terms of the licensing agreement entered into on their behalf. The data may be confidential but the cost to 88E is not.

Sorry Olderwiser. Yes, I definitely meant XCD, not Xcite! Sorry.

Just in case any readers aren't following what I'm sarcastically referring to, good ol' Dave Wall was the largest/second largest shareholder in XCD Energy which was acquired by 88E (where the very same DW was MD) at a wholly unjustified premium. XCD brought Project Peregrine into the 88E portfolio which gave DW an exit from his zombie holding in XCD and then Erik Opstad's ELKO got his mitts on the prime contractor's role for Merlin-1 and Merlin-2. Hats off to them. And it's all those "genuine 88E LTHs" who have transferred all that wealth to them. Many congrats.

15:23
Hi Olderwiser - thanks for the post which is noted with thanks. Do you suspect Dave Wall being the largest or second largest shareholder in Xcite Energy may have formed a tiny, almost immeasurable, hardly worth mentioning, a sliver, a miniscule fragment, a wafer thin argument for 88E to head westwards to Umiat/Peregrine? Hmmm........

Also, do you agree that on the face of it, $3m does seem to be an incredibly low figure to pay for the 3D seismic at Icewine East? TIA

14:45
ShareGuru22 - if by "values" you mean relying on a short term tsunami of naive and unsophisticated US OTC punters who have been fed lies on social media platforms by convicted fraudster Alex Delarge and know-nothing ingenues like Katie from NJ then you're absolutely right. But in that case, your definition of "value" and mine differ enormously.

Right then chrisev1, set about it. Contact *your* executives, ask the question, tell them to stop this pathetic drip, drip effect of delivering the true cost to shareholders of the 3D seismic data. The way 88E management treat their shareholders *is not normal*. Good luck.

13:52
Hi chrisev1 - I'm not setting out to be rude here, but I have informed this forum *at least* a dozen times how much 3D seismic cost PANR/GB. For example, it's in my post timed at 13:09 today.

I'm not trying to be dramatic or overly ominous but it's past time serious 88E shareholders got on top of this so you know exactly where you stand.

12:54
Yep, chrisev1. One word. Cost.

It cost GB c.$80m to shoot 3D seismic in the last decade. If you genuinely believe the cost to 88E of licensing the 3D data from SAE is $3m in total then I have a bridge over a river in the Sahara to sell you.

Any genuine 88E LTHs who regard themselves as fundamental investors should be peppering Ashley Gilbert with questions in order to pin down the true cost of the 3D data. Afraid of the answer? Or quite happy for a distant management team to continue to pull the wool over your eyes? Yet another example of 88E management being economical with the truth? When are shareholders going to wake up?

If it all ends in tears, users of this forum *cannot say* they weren't warned.

10:18
Hi CEObaib - I don't doubt for a second that PANR will seek to delineate the resource between the HRZ and the TD of Alkaid-2 at some point in the future. It's just that the primary purpose of Alkaid-2 (by a mile) is to drill the horizontal, perf and frack it to gather as much data as possible on flow rates. Maintaining the integrity of the wellbore and minimising risk was vitally important for Alkaid-2. Nonetheless, we're looking at substantial upgrades to the SMD, Alkaid Deep and the original Alkaid anomaly. Management has specifically flagged incoming upgrades in the RNS plus attendant interviews so now it's just a case of *when* the upgrades are announced and the *scale* of the upgrades. Good stuff.

Hi SunZoo - agreed about this accessible resource (ie. roadside drilling in the disturbed corridor) because it will allow more speedy development => cashflow at the beginning of development => more attractive for external investors => higher NPV of the assets => higher equity value to PANR shareholders.

A phased development with incremental growth in cashflow heading eastwards from the roadside could improve the commerciality of the project by a substantial degree. If so proved, PANR management's hand will be strengthened when negotiating farm outs or a corporate sale.

11:24
Please ignore Ddraig's ill-informed post. The decision to cease drilling had nothing to do with any permit paperwork. As previously advised by Telemachus:

"The casing program and Blow Out Preventer (BOP) Stack were designed for normal pressures down to the top of the HRZ. The design has to accommodate the maximum pressure brought back up to the surface (using a gas gradient) so Pantheon chose not to drill into the overpressured zone (and knew before they spudded). If there was a risk of running into a fault that might communicate pressures through the HRZ, then neither Pantheon nor the regulator would want to take the risk of exceeding the certified working pressure of the BOP.

This is not a big deal nor a surprise to Pantheon and we should be pleased that we have deepened the Lowest Known Oil (LKO) and can now extend the area under closure down to this level, which dramatically increases the contingent resource in Alkaid.

Now we just need to show good initial flow rates and sensible decline rates to support 1-2 Mbo recoveries per well and we are off to the races. This well result reconfirms my view that we have a >80% chance of pulling this off."

It was never, repeat never, in the company's plan to intersect the HRZ in Alkaid-2. Ddraig has come over all feverish again about the HRZ on the 88E forum. This despite the fact that for the last couple of years he's been one of the more realistic 88E posters who has advised his fellow 88E shareholders to move on from thoughts of commercialising the HRZ. An astonishing about turn unprompted ***by either company***.

Please listen to Telemachus over Ddraig on matters O&G and Alaska. One is a world class expert in the sector, the other comments on the mental health of anonymous posters with whom he disagrees. 'Nuff said.

12:15
Hi SunZoo - if you're talking about the *combined* "Alkaid anomaly + Alkaid Deep", the recent data from the vertical hole at Alkaid-2 proved Bob Rosenthal was correct when forecasting "the same again" underneath the original Alkaid-1 anomaly discovery. As such, I believe the *combined* Alkaid recoverable resource will be at least 300mmbo v's the current contingent resource of 76.5mmbo. Note also the improved permeability and porosity data recovered at Alkaid-2 which points to an upgrade to the conservatively guided Recovery Factor.

If you're referring to the recoverable resource which can be produced from gravel pads within the "disturbed corridor" on each side of the Dalton Highway, then I defer to Telemachus' analysis where he now calculates the 'roadside' recoverable resource figure to be c.400mmbo (from the SMD, Alkaid anomaly and Alkaid Deep).

Happy to be corrected but I think the disturbed corridor is 5 miles in width, 2.5 miles on each side of the Dalton.

Thu 23:04
Hi Villa01 - indeed, TAPS running at 25-30% capacity. The ownership structure of TAPS is as follows: Hilcorp 49.1%, Conoco 29.6%, Exxon 21.3% plus Alaskan communities. Remember BP sold all their Alaskan assets to Hilcorp, which included their share in TAPS.

I definitely take your point about the TAPS owners having an interest in PANR's light crude so it can be blended with lower API crude being produced elsewhere on the North Slope. Whether that prompts them into some sort of corporate activity, who knows? We'll have to wait'n'see.

Who else could be in the frame to buy PANR's assets. just mulling out loud here but I wonder if, due to the increased environmental attention on hydrocarbon extraction in the Arctic Circle, a private O&G firm/family office/specialist financial institution might be the acquiror? Perhaps listed companies wouldn't want the environmental heat? Who knows, just thinking out loud. No more than that.

Hi Villa01 - as far as I'm aware, TAPS only transports crude oil from the North Slope to Valdez. no connection whatsoever with Canadian crude/oil sands/bitumen.

That said, PANR's 35-40 API sweet, light crude has a low viscosity which is exactly what TAPS needs as most other crude produced on the Slope is of a higher viscosity. Because TAPS only operates at 25-30% of capacity, the slow flow is an issue which TAPS is concerned about. in recent years there's been chatter about constructing new pump stations and/or heating the crude so that its passage is made somewhat smoother!

Jay Cheatham (CEO) has previously described that PANR's light crude will attract a premium price to the standard ANS crude price because TAPS is desperate for low viscosity crude. Hope that helps.

19:26
Hi Villa01 - I understand why you're posing this question. The thing is, PANR's acreage is only on State land. I genuinely don't think there's much the Feds can do to prevent the SoA from permitting PANR/AN Other to develop the oilfield. If anything, PANR's location immediately adjacent to the Dalton H'way and TAPS should make it its development a smoother process than other new projects on the North Slope.

I guess there may be less interest in acquiring or funding Arctic assets from the sector and banks due to the increased attention they might receive from the environmental lobby? That said and accepted, the loud squealing from the US consumer about "$6 a gallon gas" recently suggests to me that if the project stands up commercially, the money will find a route to us to chase a return.

19:11
That's no good, RKHChippy. I'll let swendab1 know of your predicament and see what he can do. I don't think you're Prolapse fwiw, lol.

Tue 20:23 and Tue 22:50
Hi Baxi44 & CEObaib - Agreed. CEO Jay Cheatham has previously stated the Alkaid Unit will be <10% of the total Alaskan asset base for PANR. Talitha is larger still, but the mammoth reservoir is the BFF at Theta West. c.1000ft thick and >10 miles in length.

Wed 15:51 and Wed 16:38
Hi CEObaib - at current POO, Hilcorp may very well be able to raise the finance to farm in to PANR's acreage. Do bear in mind that debt formed the majority of the funds applied to the purchase of BP's Alaskan assets by Hilcorp. Definitely worth reading Brom's post timed at 16:38. I distinctly recall Bob Rosenthal describing Hilcorp as "plumbers" rather than explorers or frontier developers.

I can certainly see the sense in Hilcorp acquiring a seat at the table if PANR does indeed possess the second/third largest oilfield in Alaska. It's worth remembering they're the largest shareholder in TAPS as a result of the BP acquisition. That said, it's not Hilcorp's area of expertise to develop an oilfield from virgin ground, so to speak. Becoming a passive shareholder to access the data? Maybe. The likely operator of the PANR asset in the first chapter of development? Unlikely IMHO.

16:39
Hi chrisev1 - thanks for the reply. For the record, I believe that you and many others are interested in the answers to those questions. Here's the MD of 88E's email address, as kindly provided by Brom. Forget about "Scot126" and pretend my posts today were written by "USOTCpumper". Copy'n'paste the questions, email Ashley Gilbert and tell the forum what response you receive. According to Brom, he replies almost immediately to shareholder enquiries.

agilbert@88energy.com

Forget for 10 min this bulletin board joust with me. You've already stated you'd be interested in the answers to the questions. Failure to contact 88E management cannot be laziness, you're happy enough to post frequently on this forum after all. You tell me, is the only other logical inference that you're scared of the answers? Will greater transparency from management lead you to doubt your historical faith in the company? You tell me?

To anyone else reading this exchange.....there's nothing weird or nuisance-like in contacting the management of a company in which you are invested. No need to be shy, just get on with it and ask the pertinent questions.

16:59
Hiya ShareGuru22 - yep, up to, during and after 2008. Oh and please see correction below.

"Haha is it factually correct that you were [delete "was"] an investment banker up to and during 2008, Scot? But shall we trust your every word on investment analysis of 88e yes? Trustworthy bloke I'm sure."

That's the beautiful thing, Shareguru22, you don't have to trust me. It's dead easy, just ask 88E management the questions....you trust them, don't you??????

agilbert@88energy.com

14:33
Factually incorrect, ShareGuru22. I have received a number of messages of thanks from 88E shareholders on the other place and on Twitter for my work on digging out the *facts* of the 88E investment case.

Second point: the reason I refer to Brom so often is because a) he is by a standard deviation (or two!) the most prolific poster on this forum b) he is knowledgeable about the subject matter c) he informs us the company replies to his queries immediately and it's patently clear he has an excellent working relationship with management d) he is referred to reverentially by so many folk on this forum despite only admitting twice (or perhaps three times?) in his >26k posts that he trades the spikes generated by social media, unrelated to fundamental value.

As for the reliance on mkt cap, that's just a silly comment, isn't it ShareGuru22. Whether you're a short term trader in and out of a stock for 10mins or a long term investor in for a decade, the mkt cap is always the primary determinant. The very act of bidding and offering *always* feeds through to the mkt cap.

chrisev1 et al. - does anyone else find it peculiar that Brom supplies factual responses/commentary/opinion very swiftly if/when the answer casts 88E in a positive light.....and yet it's "crickets" whenever an answer might not be so flattering? What about Brom completely ignoring the posts of a former LTH and frequent poster on Hot Copper and lse, olderwiser, whom Brom used to quote directly and engage with? This abrupt change in Brom's behaviour arrived only when olderwiser began to raise questions and concerns about the information and guidance released by 88E management and subsequent empirical results. Huh. Anyone else seeing a pattern here?

So, chrisev1, genuine question for you and please be honest. As an 88E shareholder, would you be interested in the answers to the questions I raised in the posts below?

2/ (continued from below)

3) Has the 88E BoD instructed their lawyers to release the funds from the ELKO share sales in 2022? If so, when were the shares sold, at what price and what was the total sum realised? Did ELKO sell all of the shares allotted to them for the 2022 season, just as they did in 2021? Why is the 88E BoD not being transparent with its shareholders? What are they hiding?

4) Is 88E management gilding the lily when describing to 88E shareholders their hope that the common reservoirs will possess even better characteristics south of the border than in PANR's acreage.....especially when DMAX calculations appear to have been completely ignored by 88E? Are 88E management misrepresenting the relative properties of the acreage north and south of the boundary line between PANR and 88E?

This are all fair questions. They're all standard questions which any equity analyst or fund manager around the world would ask about 88E. I look forward to this forum engaging on the facts of the investment case. Or is everyone apart from Ddraig here to play pass the parcel instead of popping down to the casino? /end