Member Info for Scot126

Hi Islandgirl - the DW/88E quote was re-purposed by Share Talk....you'll have to ask them why? The quote did *not* come from anyone associated with PANR.

Exciting 4 weeks ahead. Good luck to all PANR holders on this bulletin board. For any UK or Aussie 88E holders or US $EEENF holders looking to find out more information about Pantheon Resources, perhaps because you've seen Pantheon referred to on 88E bulletin boards, the very best source of information is the "PANR - Alaska North Slope (moderated)" thread on A.D.V.F.N.

Hi Woll and cluelesstim - actually, it makes PANR's acreage more valuable, not less. Far from the Willow news being negative or even neutral for PANR, it's actually positive. When you have a spare couple of minutes, Google "States Rights in the USA" and then have a nose around from the present back to the Founders, the Constitution and the Federalist Papers and you'll swiftly see that oil will be produced on SoA land as long as the Alaskan population wishes it to be produced. GLA

Wrong again, cluelesstim. You rally must educate yourself on Federal v's State land and the law as it pertains to mineral rights. Whilst you're at it, Google "States Rights in USA" and you'll see legal precedent going all the way back to the Founders, the Constitution and the Federalist Papers which enshrine the state's rights with the Federal structure of the Union. Hit the thread up again once you've done that.

Hi cluelesstim - actually, investment into the Alaska North Slope is increasing, not decreasing. I fear you also don't understand the difference between Federal land (Biden has an influence here, of course) and State of Alaska land. You'll no doubt be delighted to read that *ALL* of PANR's acreage is situated on SoA land. It may interest you further to learn that >92% of Alaskan state revenue comes from royalties and taxes associated with the resource sector so there are no plans to limit oil production on State lands, quite the opposite in fact.

Trust that helps. GLA

Aye, it's a real shame because marmaris is not a bad person, in fact he's a good guy IMHO. As for Telemachus1, I wouldn't want to go up against his pub quiz team! GLA

Lol, still don't know where to look, do you? Classic.

Now, that was very funny, Harry_K.

As an aside, Harry_K, do you know how many shares in issue there are for PANR? Thanks in advance.

PS Who on earth do you think pointed you out to Justin? Jeepers.

Your memory fails you, marmaris. I'm not going to argue with you about what you can and cannot recall from years ago.

I am crystal clear on the following. Nobody outside of the company, the regulator or the contractors have been briefed on the well design. This is a categoric fact. That you have chosen to weigh in on a $20m drill, thus undermining shareholders' confidence without having *any basis whatsoever* for your criticisms is puzzling, unprofessional and disrespectful to your fellow shareholders.

This is not East Texas where you righteously and publicly (with my personal encouragement to speak from the floor, if you remember, because you said you were nervous and preferred to speak to the company after the AGM had finished) asked about actual historical operational facts and thereafter made constructive criticisms and suggestions for future operations. Unlike you, my memory serves me well. I recall well the fact you offered your services to Jay, maybe even said you'd work on the next Texas drill for free (very non-Scottish!!). I recall your special interest in Tyler, for example. I recall passing on your details to the BoD and encouraging you and the BoD to communicate with each other. You maybe felt I didn't back you up sufficiently but, in truth, any opinion I had on drilling carried zero weight with the BoD - and rightly so. I did all I could at the time ref your inputs.

In Alaska, you have not seen the well design, you have not questioned the BoD about their assumptions, you have not researched Charlie-1, you have not researched Alkaid or Pipeline State #1, you have not been briefed by Nordic Calista, Cruz Construction, 88E or PMO.

You've had your say, now I'll have mine. Unless you have specific knowledge about the Talitha #A well design, which I allege you do not, then do the right thing and keep your baseless thoughts to yourself or sell your stock. That's the honorable course to adopt, not this pathetic sniping from thousands of miles away about a drill you know nothing about. My goodness, man, you even posted a while back asking others to provide you with the depths of the various target horizons when the info was publicly available in the company presentations. I cannot believe you honestly think your recent behaviour is acceptable. I am saddened and disappointed by your recent posts. Oh, and while I'm at it, what are the lottery numbers going to be this weekend since you're obviously in the fortune-telling business these days.

No idea, gemstar, none whatsoever. I'd respectfully suggest that it's up to the person making the claims to show the evidence, the proof or to withdraw their comments. If the comments are based in fact, fine, tell us more. But if they're not, the claims have surely got to be withdrawn, haven't they? GLA

Not one factual argument in your reply, Harry_K. No value add, no rooting out the facts, no attempt to add to the sum of human knowledge. Just more cringeworthy ad hominem attacks. Lol, you don't even pretend to address the investment case these days! Pathetic.

Harry_K - that's a naive characterisation of my historical analysis of PANR’s East Texas days. Actually, delete “naive”, we both know it’s nefarious on your part. My upside case back then was based on the fantastic initial results from VOBM#1 and VOS#1 and the natural mathematical extrapolation which followed based on the analogue field nearby and the results from the first two wells. Unfortunately the JV then experienced a casing collapse (casing supplied by Kaiser Francis, do you know of a more blue chip O&G name, Harry_K?), a contractor (Halliburton) drilling error in Tyler followed by two genuine errors on the part of Vision/PANR. My assertions, at the time, were based on management guidance – fact. That’s what analysts use, genius, otherwise they wouldn’t be analysts, they’d be in the management teams of the companies they cover.
You overlook my profound expressions of regret, contrition and humility. You also overlook the self-criticism that saw me castigate myself for not forcing the issue on transparency as it pertained to the JV agreement, together with the admission that PANR had not been sufficiently proactive in overseeing the Vision operations on the ground in Texas. Naturally I understand why you omit these details because your narrative would collapse around your feet.
Have I learned anything from this particular chapter in life? Hmmm, fair question and time will tell. I would contend PANR 2.0 is a great deal more transparent than its earlier iteration. Plus the merger with Great Bear has most certainly improved the depth of human resource within the BoD and other company employees. The partnership with eSeis would also appear to have borne fruit.
Lucky? Aye, maybe so. The metaphor of two drunks propping each other up was used by me and plenty of others at the time of the merger. The good news for you, Harry_K, is that by jealously memorising the “seven figure Scot” info, you’ll be able to inform the two bulletin boards of my return on this part of my portfolio whilst spitting teeth and turning green with envy – a most ugly character trait, but then you’ll be aware my inbox is littered with such pathetic mutterings. I guess I’ll survive. GLA

PS Harry_K, why not head off and do some research, try to be constructive, add to the sum of human knowledge? You know, the kinda stuff that the grown ups do.....or aren't you capable of doing so?

Correction: All of PANR's acreage is located on State of Alaska land, not Federal land. Thus the Biden moratorium will have zero effect on PANR. Fact.

Really? Tell us specifically where they "don't read great"?

Hmmm, not sure there was anything wrong with the Charlie-1 drill per se, marmaris? PANR always did suspect 88E had some phasing risk within their geological model which was either not appreciated or under-appreciated.

There have been some 20:20 hindsight statements made about PMO's influence on the location of the well itself, with some commenting that PMO "outvoted" 88E and were able to relocate the well location as part of the farm in negotiation. In addition, it literally took 88E months and months to re-interpret the data from Charlie-1 so whatever decisions were, or were not made about flow-testing prior to abandonment was clearly a grey area rather than a mistake made on a black or white basis.

All in all, marmaris, the vast majority of folk had no issue whatsoever with the execution of the well design, including both PMO and 88E management by the way. Most are pointing to 88E/PMO's geological interpretation being off or incomplete rather than anything being wrong with the well design or its execution.

Unless you know anything different?

Hi marmaris - I'm just checking, not debating, ok. You've seen that it's the same rig and crew which drilled Charlie-1 last season? TD for Charlie-1 was 11,100ft v's 10,200ft planned for Talitha #A? Also, like Talitha #A, Charlie-1 intersected multiple horizons on the way to the deepest HRZ layer? GLA

CAR3Y - looks to me that you require to educate yourself about the difference between Federal and State of Alaska land and attendant legal structure. Here's a stat which illustrates the situation perfectly: O&G and mining royalties and taxes account for a staggering 92% of the State of Alaska's income for its budget. Unless Alaska is to be largely de-populated or the Federal govt wishes to subsidise all State expenditure, Alaska will be producing oil from *State* land for decades to come.

Squirrel26 - change of Presidential administration will not have featured as a factor in PANR's permitting process. Why? Because the State of Alaska is the land owner, royalty holder and regulator for *ALL* of PANR's acreage. The Federal govt effectively has no oversight on any part of PANR's regulatory framework.

Hope the above is useful.

Perfectly fair post, Ddraig, and I agree with your timing assumptions FWIW. I just don't have any explanation for you, sorry.

Lol, who told you it was a dawdle, marmaris? I tell you what, even if it was a "dawdle", I don't fancy doing anything when it's -30 Centigrade. Brass monkeys and then some!

Sorry if I haven't been clear. Not for a second do I not wish to read marmaris' reaction to the well design. It's just that we don't yet have the parameters of the project = the description of the Talitha #A well design from which marmaris can then react. Does that make sense?

All we know right now is they spudded on 13/1/21; the drill is targeting "in excess of a billion barrels of oil" over four horizons; it's management's intention to flow test each horizon if warranted by the data; and their intention is to drill and test the SMD by drilling a horizontal. That's it, that's about all we know.

Some of us *seem* to recall Jay or Bob describing the lateral being drilled towards the end of operations but a) our memories could be totally wrong b) the early spud may have given the company more flexibility to re-shape the well design??? c) plus lots of other stuff we just don't know yet.

marmaris - I'm no mind reader. You type out your questions, I'll make sure they get delivered. Deal?

Eek, sorry to hear that, marmaris.

Sorry I can't help you with more details on the well design. The information just isn't out there *yet*. Once the description of the well design is published by the company (RNS, webinar, interview, whatever method they choose?) then I'm sure we'd love to read your thoughts. Until that point, we're just scrabbling around in the dark, non?

Google Nordic Calista in Alaska. PANR has contracted the No 3 well which you can see on their website. Also, they're using the same crew which drilled 88E's Charlie-1 as per the well design in Q1 '20.