Member Info for Scot126

08:44
Hi Pander - I'm calling nothing short term. I'm a fundamental investor by training and character. I'm not particularly built for trading. What I do believe is *if* the BoD are anywhere near being correct about their geological model, it won't matter if any of us have bought stock at 78p, 88p or 98p. If Theta West is as big and as concentrated as they understand it to be, the SP will, mathematically, go well north of 1000p IMHO. So you trader types can knock yourselves out but it's not my game.

Thu 22:28 (following up on questions I promised I'd repost for csw12 to answer. csw12 stated he didn't believe content on bulletin boards affected SPs so presumably he'll wish these questions answered for his own self-interest.

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why the US$12.6m Merlin-1 well came in at a total cost of US$29m, a whopping 130% above budget?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why there is no flow test planned for Merlin-2?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why the Capital Structure page on the website had to be amended within 24 hours in order to reflect a restatement of ex-MD Dave Wall's personal holding? Was Dave Wall considered a "bad leaver"? Will the Chairman outline the full extent of Dave Wall's exit package incorporating all shares, options, performance rights plus any other entitlements?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why the company intends to go ahead with drilling Merlin-2 this upcoming winter season when the decision to delay Willow by Conoco ensures Peregrine and Umiat will continue to be stranded assets for the foreseeable future?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why the General Manager of Alaska Operations values the adjacent acreage to Yukon at an "NPV of less than zero dollars", thus sending out what can only be taken as formal guidance that Yukon's value within the 88E portfolio is also zero dollars?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman what he considers to be a related party transaction?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman about the timing of invoices from ELKO, the payments made to ELKO and the two tranches of shares issued to ELKO?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman what overlap of individuals and/or companies existed between ELKO and APDC?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman about Erik Opstad's personal/family/business interests and any involvement they may or may not have with APDC and/or ELKO?

Did Dave Wall or Inyati Capital or Erik Opstad or any other Mr Opstad's corporate or family interests receive any commission or other payment(s) for facilitating the share issues to ELKO and APDC in lieu of cash payments by the company?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an explanation from the Chairman why the 88E budget for marketing and corporate advisory services is so high v's peer groups?

Do you think 88E shareholders will receive an unequivocal answer from the Chairman about allegations the social media attention 88E received in the US was as a result of a co-ordinated PR campaign emanating from 88E employees and/or advisors?

NB These are clearly marked as questions, not allegations. They are good q

Fri 07:40
Hi Pander - sure, that's your opinion, no worries. But as Mindbender makes plain in the following post, PANR has a declared 1.9bbo contingent resource and is valued at c.£600m and 88E has zero contingent barrels of oil and is valued at c.£200m. I'd say the market is getting something very wrong here, wouldn't you?! Even moving away from the most direct and appropriate comparative valuation (that of 88E), in absolute terms it values PANR at 44c per contingent barrel in the ground. And this compares to Oil Search paying $3.10 per contingent barrel in the ground to Armstrong in Q3 2017 when the POO was approx $50.

Yep, I'll repeat again....IMO the market, generally speaking, is unaware of PANR and PANR's Alaskan asset. Indisputably, this *will* change *if* the winter programme confirms the directors' understanding of the asset's geology.

This is a *very, very rough* comparison for context only. If the "blue sky" model of Theta West is proven to be the case, this newly discovered oilfield will approach the volume of oil extracted on the UK side of the North Sea since production began in the 1970's. When Bob Rosenthal spoke metaphorically of the Alaska North Slope super-basin as being akin to the Valley of the Giants, he wasn't wrong.

Fri 12:13

Hi RKHChippy - yep, the East Texas leases have been relinquished. It was announced in an RNS and/or the interims/finals at some point in 2020 or 2021, I can't recall specifically, sorry.

The sole focus is on Alaska now. Ironically, had PANR not had its struggles with East Texas, we would not have been a candidate to merge with Great Bear. So it may very well all end up to be far more successful than ever imagined when PANR was in Texas, but I could certainly have done without the intervening wilderness years!!

corrections - sorry.

"Personally, I don't see the results from COP26 having any bearing whatsoever......"
"so the deal will be decided on the merits of the asset......"

Fri 15:51
Hi Sailplane - perhaps worth remembering the ice road isn't due to begin construction until 15/12/21 according to the plans submitted to the Alaskan regulator. Providing the reporting from the Petroleum News and the Proactive interview is accurate (I've got no reason to believe it isn't) then PANR remains in negotiations with parties (NB plural) to secure funding for the anticipated winter programme. Personally, I don't see the results from COP26 have any bearing whatsoever on the decision-making of the potential farm-in partners (v's the macro environment pre-COP26) so the deal with be decided on merits of the asset as a specific investment, with no "new" macro news required to be overlaid on the process. AIMHO.

If we haven't heard anything by 1/12/21, I'll maybe start asking some timing questions, until then I expect I'll just have to be patient like everyone else!

Fri 17:40
Hi Pander - at least there was some logic to your strategy rather than just sticking your finger up in the air, so to speak.

Please do ensure you read the links I provided informing readers of the promotion of PANR to the MSCI Global Small Cap Index. What you choose to do with that factual information thereafter is your business. Perhaps worth remembering also that Farallon does *not* own all of the remaining 15.95% CHONS holding. We know Great Bear founders'n'funders own some of that 15.95% although we don't know if it's 3%, 5% or 8%, etc. I'll let the thread know if I ever find out but I have been unsuccessful in my attempts so far.

Some excellent news to report. PANR has been promoted to the MSCI Small Cap Index. Please see page 8 of the first link for confirmation of same.

hTTps://app2.msci.com/eqb/gimi/smallcap/MSCI_Nov21_SCPublicList.pdf

Ever since VOBM#2H, PANR has been in the MSCI Global Micro Cap Index. Please see page 7 of the second link for confirmation of PANR's deletion from the Micro Cap Index.

hTTps://app2.msci.com/eqb/gimi/stdindex/MSCI_Nov21_MicroPublicList.pdf

These index changes were announced at 11pm London time today and will take effect from the cob on 30/11/21. What *generally* happens is that the index funds, which are designed to mimic the performance of the MSCI Global Small Cap Index, will have between 12/11/21 - 30/11/21 (incl) to make the required changes to their holdings and weightings so that they are correctly positioned for the opening of the markets on 1/12/21.

This particular index is revised semi-annually; May and November. My *understanding* is PANR will benefit from this Index revision as it will result in a net buying requirement by the index funds. That's not to say we might not have some volatility as lines are sold by micro cap index funds who can't just transfer it to their small cap fund big brother. The brokers who do this business are generally the US megabanks who have quant teams working up the anticipated revisions but they can just as easily pass off certain lines of stock to be bought/sold if they don't think they have the capacity to deal in a particular name, if it's a headache for them to trade or if they just can't be @rsed because it's small cap/micro cap so who gives a f^^k.

No, I don't know the quantum of net demand. I'll try to find out from former colleagues but I'm out of that particular loop more than with other contacts. Those with long-ish memories will recall the last time PANR was promoted from micro cap to small cap. It resulted in pretty decent buying volume which moved the SP up fairly smartly from 150p to circa 180p. Lol, let's hope and trust we remain in the small cap index for longer than last time, six months!!! Great stuff.

Sun 23:25
csw12 – hmmm, can’t sell my PANR at a loss as that’s mathematically impossible. Buy 88E? Nope, it’s far too expensive for my money. My answer to your final question is the exact same answer I gave you the last time you asked. I don’t know.

Sun 23:49
Blackadder2708 – nope, not a trader. Equity analyst and equity sales chiefly, with a bit of corporate finance thrown in.

Mon 07:01
Hi xdannyboy – yep, I know what a NPV is. I agree with Erik Opstad, General Manager of Alaska Operations for 88E. It means that unless lots of other interested parties invest mountains of dollars it will cost more to produce oil at Sourdough, and therefore Yukon, than the price at which they’ll be able to sell it.

I note you agree that 88E has no proven discovery. Why is it valued at circa £200m in that case?

Ok, looks like you’re in for the sentiment trade, relying on the punting dollars of uneducated OTC gamblers in the US. Cool. The thing is, using the CoS and best estimates provided by 88E management, even if Merlin-2 is an operational success, it’ll still be next to impossible to justify a mkt cap of £200m. If you’re relying on the US sentiment trade, I’m not overly convinced it’ll be there in sufficient strength this time round. I do very much appreciate, however, that you’re not making any arguments about fair value and fundamentals. Nope, it’s a “suck in the moron US punters trade” so knock yourself out.

Tues 09:39
csw12 – your sentence “It's going to be an interesting ride, and nothing said here (positively or negatively) is going to make any difference to the SP” fascinates me. To declare up front, my personal *opinion* is that you’re wrong and that bulletin board content *can* have an effect on the SP *and* the general perception held by the market towards a specific stock.

Genuine question. If that sentence truly represents your opinion, why is it that you and many others react with such defensiveness/venom to posters asking factual questions about 88E? I get the whole “Dave Wall is an idi0t” type nonsense post, that’s worth a salvo back to the poster. But if you’re so convinced nothing posted on bulletin boards affects the SP, why not find out about some of those factual and fundamental questions so that, at the very least, you protect your capital and can assess news quickly in case the hype doesn’t arrive?

Yep, they sure did get “spiked above 3.5p”, didn’t those American punters? What makes me majorly uncomfortable is that it was Erik Opstad and his contractor mates who were the major sellers during that period, swiftly followed by Dave Wall and the APDC fellas (also Erik Opstad and his mates) when they were free to sell. Do you not feel in the pit of your stomach that something might just be awry here?

Tell you what I’ll do. I’ll post a list of those factual and fundamental questions for your attention. They’ll have no effect on the SP, according to you, so why not have a go at the answers? Good stuff.

(Sorry for u

Sun 23:25csw12 – hmmm, can’t sell my PANR at a loss as that’s mathematically impossible. Buy 88E? Nope, it’s far too expensive for my money. My answer to your final question is the exact same answer I gave you the last time you asked. I don’t know.Sun 23:49Blackadder2708 – nope, not a trader. Equity analyst and equity sales chiefly, with a bit of corporate finance thrown in. Mon 07:01Hi xdannyboy – yep, I know what a NPV is. I agree with Erik Opstad, General Manager of Alaska Operations for 88E. It means that, unless lots of other interested parties invest mountains of dollars, it will cost more to produce oil at Sourdough, and therefore Yukon, than the price at which they’ll be able to sell it.I note you agree that 88E has no proven discovery. Why is it valued at circa £200m in that case?Ok, looks like you’re in for the sentiment trade, relying on the punting dollars from uneducated OTC gamblers in the US. Cool. The thing is, using the CoS and best estimates provided by 88E management, even if Merlin-2 is an operational success, it’ll still be next to impossible to justify *today's* mkt cap of £200m. If you’re relying on the US sentiment trade, I’m not overly convinced it’ll be there in sufficient strength this time round? I do very much appreciate, however, that you’re not making any arguments about fair value and fundamentals. Nope, it’s a “suck in the moron US punters trade”, so knock yourself out.Tues 09:39csw12 – your sentence “It's going to be an interesting ride, and nothing said here (positively or negatively) is going to make any difference to the SP” fascinates me. To declare up front, my personal *opinion* is that you’re wrong and that bulletin board content *can* have an effect on the SP *and* the general perception held by the market towards a specific stock. So that’s where I am. Genuine question. If that sentence truly represents your opinion, why is it that you and many others react with such defensiveness/venom to posters asking factual questions about 88E? I get the whole “Dave Wall is an idi0t” type nonsense post, that’s worth a salvo back to the poster. But if you’re so convinced nothing posted on bulletin boards affects the SP, why not find out about some of those factual and fundamental answers so that, at the very least, you protect your capital and can assess news quickly in case the hype doesn’t arrive?Yep, they sure did get “spiked above 3.5p”, didn’t those American punters? What makes me majorly uncomfortable is that it was Erik Opstad and his contractor mates who were the major sellers during that period, swiftly followed by Dave Wall and the APDC fellas (also Erik Opstad and his mates) when they were free to sell. Do you not feel in the pit of your stomach that something might just be awry here?Tell you what I’ll do. I’ll post a list of those factual and fundamental questions for your attention. The

Tue 18:45
csw12 - cracking post. Blunt and to the point. No obfuscation or speaking with forked tongue. h/t

Tue 11:34
GS - on the contrary, 88E has no "history of spotting a good play". If anything it's the exact opposite. I'm not going to presume any researched knowledge on your part because you have not displayed any capabilities on that front in the time you've posted on this forum. Therefore a question is in order, rather than a debate/discussion.

So, GS, is the following statement True or False? 88E displayed their ability to "spot a good play" by handing back leased acreage to the State of Alaska which the NN immediately picked up in the next auction and which now forms part of the Theta West/Talitha project.

12:33
tonynorstrom1,

- your is possessive, you're is a contraction of 'you are'. Hope that helps.

- Happy for you to identify the "rubbish" I post. Or perhaps it's just easier to adopt the superficial approach with which you're so closely associated? Easier to post snark from the sidelines rather than do the hard work required to research the fundamentals of the investment case? Pathetic.

- No, of course I don't know the correct valuation for PANR. There is a great deal of data still to be uncovered, no question. What I am doing is applying the standard and long-standing valuation methodology which is used throughout the O&G industry for valuing E&P projects. I note you have not suggested an alternative method. still working on it? It's dead easy to post the jibes but incredibly difficult to come up with a viable alternative, eh?

- Correction. When replying to "are these metrics still valid today" I was thinking of the risked/unrisked methodology and NPV calculation....the orthodox techniques, if you will. On reading your reply, I now suspect you were referring to the various *inputs* which are inserted into the model. Well of course these factors change, tonynorstrom1. These inputs have not been set in stone for the last 50 years, have they? Naturally the discount rate, POO and other key inputs will change over time. I'm not sure anyone has argued otherwise?

Taking a step back and looking at the macro which is what I suspect you were alluding to. Sure the ESG policies adopted by investors and the green transition will have affected valuations, but family offices, private funds who are not reliant on external capital will happily step in if the RoC and RoI metrics are sufficiently attractive. Fine, accepted. So the discount rate will change, so what. It'll change for every other O&G project too. By the time a potential investor has alighted on PANR as a stock specific investment I contend they have already accepted the risks associated with the O&G sector, then they've accepted the risk associated with the E&P sub-sector. Thus I would argue they've already moved past the questions you're seeking to pose at this precise moment. Your questions *may* carry greater relevance once the asset or company is put up for sale but we're not there yet, are we?

Thanks for the tip to constantly examine and refresh the *inputs* to my model. You off now to tell Inuits to wrap up warmly this winter?

08:43
Hi RKHChippy - happy to charge you if it would make you feel better?!

Hmmmm, you ask a fair question. I suspect there are a number of reasons for this.

- PANR management has not, IMHO, devoted sufficient time in their collective diaries to disseminate the PANR investment case. From my experience, I also assess PANR is at the ultra-conservative end of the PR/promotional spectrum within the AIM E&P sector.

- There remains in the minds of some investors the legacy of East Texas.

- The most obvious and natural addressable market for potential PANR investors is located in North America and is blissfully unaware of PANR/Theta West/Talitha/Alkaid. I forecast this will change in a massive way in the scenario where this winter's anticipated operations are successful.

- The whole ESG movement (which FWIW I have zero problem with) has markedly reduced the number of UK professional investors who are able to invest in the O&G sector. In turn, this has meant more reliance within the E&P sector on the more flighty capital of private investors/traders with a proportional increase in short-termism.

I'm sure there'll be myriad other reasons that I haven't even considered but I hope the above provides some answers to your question.

10:58
tonynorstrum1 - how's the writing going, energy engineer? Really hope it's improved since your last article.

"What does fair value even mean ??"
scot126 : In the context of the E&P listed sector, it's the figure arrived at after employing the standard valuation methodology which examines and attempts to value the hydrocarbon resource by applying risk factors to the data as currently understood. You know this, tonynorsrtom1, or rather you should do.

"A stock is only worth what someone is prepared to pay and the markets changing."
Well done, genius, you've just described a market place anywhere in the world. Your market could be buying'n'selling legs of lamb or shares in an E&P stock. What is it you're trying to have a go at here?

"Many oil stocks are cheaper now than they were a year ago on most metrics..."
Fair enough. The thing is, I'm not aware of one UK E&P stock with the *potential* that their acreage contains a newly discovered oilfield which management assess *could* be the third largest/second largest or largest onshore oilfield in US history. I contend that it is *this part* of the PANR investment case and narrative which the market is almost entirely unaware of.

".....and could well get cheaper yet."
Doubt it, but that's your call to deploy your capital as you see fit if you believe that to be the case.

"Using the traditional risked/unrisked E&P equity valuation method ........." - are these metrics still valid today ?"
Yep, sure are. The oil industry is global due to the chemical properties of a barrel of oil being broadly similar, thus there exists a global market for the commodity. The sector developed a valuation method decades ago which permits the allocators of capital to compare'n'contrast the various oil projects around the world and the differing risk/return characteristics which will shape the decision where to invest their capital. The minute you come up with a better valuation method, be sure to let us know. I'm sure the millions of professionals in the O&G industry will be forever grateful to you as they ask themselves how they didn't think of your new methodology first. Grrrr.

11:31
Hi mindbender - just a wee correction. Canaccord is PANR's house broker and not WH Ireland. FWIW, my *personal* view is the WHI analyst, Brendan Long, understands the PANR better than the Canaccord analyst (Charlie Sharp).

Of course I accept your point about house brokers and their research. I was interested to read your comment about attracting the attention of other brokers. Hmmm, it got me thinking. If the results from the Talitha #A flow test and the drill + flow test at Theta West meet or exceed management expectations then I think we can pretty much guarantee the US megabanks will start sniffing around plus the top tier of UK/European brokers. That's not to denigrate Canaccord, they're a proper broker. In addition, we've got the better than 50% likelihood (IMO) that, providing the winter season is successful, PANR will move to a dual listing on NASDAQ with all the increased attention that will undoubtedly bring.

09:19
GS ,

1) You're not my buddy, buddy.

2) Yuck! I don't think anyone would be particularly entertained by my "exposure". Believe me, I have a face for radio...and the rest of me is worse than my face!

(Part 3, continued from below)

10) How’s that after a night on the town? Better spelling than normal but the multitude of factual errors more than made up for the better spelling effort.

11) Timing on funding? Bit too early IMO. If there’s no funding in place by w/c 29th November you have my official permission to bleat out your impatience. The ice road isn’t due to start construction until 15/12/21, remember? /end

(Part 2, continued from below)

7) Factually incorrect. For the umpteenth time, in 5 -6 years of lse memebership I had only posted on the SN’s forum once, repeat once until April this year. Sometime around then, Dave Wall (former MD of SN) a) confirmed SN’s understanding that they shared an asset in Alaska with PANR and b) he went an unethical and highly questionable step further by electing to include diagrams which gave the completely false impression that the majority of certain horizons were located on the SN’s acreage. It was from the very date of that RNS when I began posting on the SN’s forum. Why? Because as a fundamental analyst, I feel compelled mathematically to undertake the standard equity market calculation of comparative analysis. Second reason is to work collectively to arrive at a more accurate understanding of the facts of the two investment cases. All very standard stuff, I’m sure everyone will agree. GS, have you ever thought of it this way? *If* the SN’s mkt cap was £10m and PANR’s was £580m, and they shared an asset as currently understood, do you not think I would be shouting from the rooftops that the SN’s mkt cap was massively *undervalued*? I’d be loading up on SN stock, naturally. The reason I don’t post such content is because it is my firm understanding based on fundamental analysis of the facts as currently understood that PANR is waaayyyy undervalued and the SN is waaayyyy over-valued. If ever the reverse is true, I’ll happily pipe up. I’m just interested in facts and maths, GS. You’re just an anonymous avatar to me, writing fantastical 0s and 1s digitally on an investors’ forum. Nothing more, nothing less. I’m sorry you appear to be having trouble coping with my content but you’re free to fact check me at any time. You have occasionally tried to do so but invariably it just reinforces the conclusion that a) you make things up as you go along and b) you lack the knowledge and understanding of the equity market and valuation techniques.

8) Hmmm, I suspect I type faster than you.

9) The “who and what I am” stuff. You’ve got it round the wrong way, GS. I am focussed solely on establishing the facts of the two investment cases and building a consensus understanding of same. You, on the other hand, appear to be intent on diverting this forum into worlds of unfathomable fantasy and conspiracy theories of your own vivid imagination. It is you, GS, who is imperilling *every other shareholder’s financial interests* with your gibberish. Just imagine if your g0bbledyg00k caught fire on st^cktw^ts just as SN’s did in March/April. The whole world would be waiting for a takeover of PANR by Farallon when Farallon was in fact selling stock in the market daily!! Do you not see the inaccurate danger you are posing to other human beings ***and*** your own financial interests?????? Jeepers.

Part 2, see above for Part 3)

01:57 and 09:19

GS - sore head again this morning? Hehehehehe. Addressing your points in turn:

1) Correct.

2) It's gauche to discuss remuneration. Mummy and Daddy Goldstinger clearly didn't teach you any manners. And Daddy Goldstinger didn't tell you that you can't hold your liquor. I only mentioned the length of my career because posters like you were accusing me of lying about my experience. You'll note I have never mentioned remuneration, unlike you. Still struggling with your place in life and achieving contentment, I see. Better to sneer and swear at those you perceive to be your enemy in life, eh? Pathetic.

3) Factually incorrect. I know one of the GB founders personally and have met some of the early founders in person. I did not know any of these people prior to PANR's involvement with GB. What in the wide, wide world of sport are you going on about when stating I didn't care about their debt burden??? You still don't have a blinkin' clue about the historical relationship between Farallon and GB founders'n'funders, do you? Jeepers, it's been months and tens of explanations from a variety of posters. What on earth is wrong with you, GS???? you've accused me of working for Farallon, working for GB and working for other dark and evil forces.......which is it? I don't care about their debt burden and yet I won't hear a word against them. Which is it? Your thought process is so tangled, so conspiratorial that I simply cannot follow what you're alleging here never mind attempt to rebut them. You're so unbelievably out of your depth here, GS, it's beyond cringeworthy.

4) Factually incorrect. I tried, with two other guys, to buy *a line* of stock from Farallon when the shares were circa 40p.

5) Incorrect. I stated your behaviour and conduct on this thread was a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. The D-K Effect is *not* a psychological disorder as you and a couple of others have alleged. Rather it is an empirical theory akin to “Herd Mentality” and “Confirmation Bias” which may be and is applied to market participants and their opinions/understanding of a stock.

6) Kinda correct. I said I would protect my investment and the interests of those with whom I’m in contact by dismantling the conspiracy theories, fantastical lies and factual errors disseminated by the likes of you. You keep posting nonsense, GS, and I’ll keep fact-checking and rebutting you. You want me to stop? Then you stop disseminating misinformation and disinformation.

(Part 1, continued above)

Cripes! I see GS has been on the sauce again!! Dear oh dear. :(