Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
what's written before you. I speculated that there might be an additional delay with 36 -2 and that if that were so the company should bring the market and the shareholders up to date. I suspect that most of the madmen posting their invective don't have a lot invested in ZPHR.
Clearly there has been a problem of some sort. We know that it is not financial and we can infer that it soes not relate to State 16-2 except insofar as the infrastructure related to an adequate gas pipeline is still not available to pump the oil.
That just leaves the real possibility of a problem with State 36-2 which is now almost a month overdue. The problem may be weather related, or it may be something more serious, but a months delay for whatever reason should be explained to the market and investors here.
Hi The Chain, the sp seems to be livening up a bit but the MMs are makinng sure it stays subdued by maintaining the spread. As for the stake building rumour you read on another BB. Like you I'd take that with a very big pinch of salt.
But I think we're getting close to something decisive. My time may be close. I hope!
1. Alxo. ZPHR does have a listing on the US market. It trades on the OTCQB Venture Market. The listing was aimed at attracting private and instirutional US investors and to increase the share's liquidity.It doesn't appear to have achieved it's objective.
2. BP Energy was the counterparty to the hedging programme. It matched the buyers to the sellers ,(ZPHR). It is an energy trading company and there is no evidence it was acting for BP plc .
If you were the creator of the Resume on ZPHR then you have done a really good job. It is clear that the information you collated was already available but it hasn't been available in a unified form until now. I for one have copied it to use it as an easy reference point.
Aposter here has criticised your contention that ZPHR would benefit from having a more experienced oil related director. Nothing wrong with that. The board is made up of finance and accounting personnel. CH,(the only member we know really), is a first class CEO but his expertise is finance related and I'm sure he would benefit from the presence of hands on oiler.
Well done you.
I hope, (a lot more than you do) that I get my exit price soon. And it's not quite 12p.
I also hope that people on here are allowed to express their opinions respectfully and knowledgebly without snide interference from people like you.
Which parts CH found such fault with. Or you could say "well he would wouldn't he"!
It is certainly the best attempt at a measured critique of Zephyr that I have seen up to now.It deals with all the activity for the past couple of years. And it is neither damning nor ,(malcy like), over exuberant with no real facts to back the claims.
I'll take it until something better researched and more provably is produced. The fact that the information is sequential and verifiable from the RNS'S is very useful.
First class ,and as well as collecting all the existing informtion in one place it raises some very important questions such as the adequacy of the team, (without questioning their abilities), and the desirability of the company being listed in the USA. Plus a lot more well examined possibilities.
As directors they must declare their shareholdings, however small ,and they have done so. And they must declare any changes to those holdings. They have declared their Origin Creek shares also.It's not negativity. It's just a matter of fact.
is a good mark,elland. I was certainly pleased to see it. But what I find hard to understand is why four of the directors hold less than 1% of the equity between them and why none of them bought any this year. Purchases on their part would have given an important signal to the market.
too from SCE2AUX. The BOD seemed to get off track about six months ,(or so), ago when it became tardy or unreliable in providing news.They knew in the Spring that they would be unable to produce from 16-2 for the lack of a pipeline, but they didn't tell the shareholders. The lateness of the bitcoin information was equivocal and the the cancellation of the webinar while understandable does not justify the lack of a resit date.
It has been a very poor shareholder year. Yes there have been good aspects such as the noop wells, but since the finance negotiations in January the wheels have looked a bit wobbly. TKIA put the message succinctly when he pointed out that very big intending investors are not interested in nonop production. What they want to see from zphr is news about its own produced oil. When that happens we will be off. When that happens.......!!