Member Info for Silkster365

Neptunes "JP has lied to us on purpose to make us invest" " We were promised we would be rich!" "The location of TE9 was moved at the final minute" "They new the results were bad as soon as they started drilling but they hid it from us". I could go on

Scandic - I was a LTH until the BB fiasco. I have followed events here since and always hoped to buy back in again if the story changed. For me, looking from the outside, I am not buying in at the moment because there will be considerable cost to move to full production and inevitably there is a raise or two to come. You have to negate this from the potential income and personally I dont think the numbers are likely to look as impressive when that is done. I would probably buy in somewhere about the 1p mark

Agreed Richardcullen - there is nothing further to be gained from deramping given where the SP is now anyway! It doesnt bother me at all, I am aligned and signed up to the strategy - drill 3 wells and sell. The SP is irrelevant. There are an awful lot of people who must be shattered from the energy required to keep spouting so many mistruths and derogatory comments about the team they heralded as one of the best just a few weeks ago. I feel for the company who have been nothing but upfront all the way through this process (they have - despite what people will say about 'being lied to' - they have never guaranteed results)

Retour kindly shared a link which is well worth watching to remind yourself why we are invested here. Unfortunately one of the first things our CEO says is that Sound are committed to a fresh approach to dealing with PIs based on "Trust and Mutual Respect". Well, I think a fair few people have let their side of the bargain down here

I'm with Crude I'm afraid. The way people have reacted to one failed drill has been astonishing and is a poor reflection on the way of the world these days. Sound are a small exploration company operating in a very high risk industry. We did our best to de-risk these 3 drills as much as possible, but its NEVER possible to guarantee a result. Otherwise Shell would be drilling success every single time!

Trellis - Brian confirmed in the Fireside chat that the geoligical data had been analysed against the seismic for TE9 & TE10. If there are differences in what the seismic shows then its very quick to draw the conclusion that TE10 could have a different result to TE9 (i.e. not the same porosity issues). Remember they will have been obtaining the geological data during the drill, not necessarily upon completion of TE9 so I personally think its reasonable. I realise the number of positive viewpoints on here now are massively outnumbered! but I am sticking to the facts of what I am told and persoonally I still believe fully in the strategy. All 3 wells are independant and we have 2 chances left to open up the play. If we dont, I am happy with what we have at TE5 supporting a sale price far greater than where we are now

"The COS has been downgraded from 30% to 25%, This is due to the poor seismic data". This is true but I wouldnt overlook the valuable Geological data that will have been obained from TE-9. The fact the team have reviewed this against the seismic data for TE-9 & TE-10 and are still happy that TE-10 is the right place to drill is a real positive in my view. It says to me that the seismic at TE-10 shows something different to TE-9. Otherwise we wouldnt bother drilling.

A fair and balanced post ddboy

Neptune - each to their own, I don’t have a problem if people feel selling is what they need to do. I’m not interested in the share price as, once again, it’s not the strategy. The strategy is drill 3 holes and sell. That is either for the high numbers we hope for, or just based on our existing discovery of 0.65TCF - which is still a huge amount in this industry anyway and means I am perfectly happy with the exposure I have. Those who want to sell, no problem, it doesn’t affect those of us aligned to the strategy

Neptune - Yes was in FAC and was happy with the boards responses. Re: seismic, it’s right they should downgrade based on the geology found in the most recent drill, as clearly it adds another layer of data to the seismic. It’s just FACT. The £1.50 a share hysteria is just that I’m afraid, not based on any facts whatsoever. Even the company confirm as much and no-one listens

Happy - this is my point though - would you like to outline all the ‘broken promises’ the Sound team have made? Seriously, please list our all the things the promised that they haven’t done. I’m afraid for all of the ones I know you will note down (based on what is flying around on this bb) I can categorise as 1 of 2 things - 1) just factually not true 2) we haven’t finished the agreed 3 drill strategy yet so you can’t judge results yet

All this hysteria. Because of one failed drill. It’s quite incredible. The sound team must be shaking their heads in utter disbelief at the behaviour of people at the moment. I don’t have the energy to challenge all the mistruths any more - people are so ‘in their heads’ now that they have lost all sense of perspective and logic. I am letting our team get on with the job, i am looking at the facts and am fully behind the strategy. 30% chance of success means the last well would miss 7 times out of 10 - why are people claiming it was guaranteed success? We move to the next and try again. This is the nature of exploration

I think the point is the company has far from ‘confirmed that’. In fact they have confirmed the exact opposite several times but you seem to be clinging on to some bizzare idea you made up yourself after talking directly to someone at Sound. It wasn’t Luca was it? If it was, maybe he had already retired and had spent the day on the lash in the Sound Equity bar?

Just logging in forthe evening. Blimey. More outrageous lies this evening I see! Despite it being explained several times in black and white FellRunner still thinks 47.5% needs to be deducted from the £1.50 a share guidance, and now we are being told about a mystery new company called Sound Equity which has been set up to steal all our money!! You couldn’t make it up.

Not sure Shaungreen - but I will interpret it as a 30% COS :D

In yesterday’s FSC, James has started saying stuff like ‘it’s high risk stuff’ and Brian is saying ‘there’s 75% chance of failure’

No - Brian said 70% chance of failure, which is another way of saying 30% chance of success. Just making the point to people who expected guaranteed results. And JP referred to High Risk High Reward which he has stated on many many occasions before now. Just people choose not to hear anything re: potential downside

I disagree re: the 'typical AIM' comment - we do not have a board of charlatans and con men, despite what some people seem to think at the moment. They are a dedicated professional team trying to carry out a strategy that everyone was more than happy with until a few days ago

chasbrown - my average is 59p.

Jimmybob - " They appear to be only drilling the 3 wells to add upside and feel that this out ways any downside risk?". Exactly!! I am not sure 95% of the investors on this board understand the strategy in the slightest For me I am in till the end as I see it as very low risk overall. Worst case, I expect to get my money back (and even then we would have to sell our existing discovery on the cheap)

Exactly. We are still in an excellent position. 0.6TCF banked and a fully funded shot (3 times) at something huge. Even if we don’t get lucky we are still in a strong position. I just don’t understand the get rich quick brigade, but as I say, that’s the way people seem to be these days

I understand your point, but ‘excellent’ seismic to noise ratio is relative. I have no doubt it is excellent, but the laymen’s interpretation of what this means is vastly different to what it actually means in the industry. To a scientist and people in the industry they S/N ratio will have been seen as ‘excellenr’ but that still doesn’t mean it’s easy to interpret. BM has tried to explain that and instead got it in the neck for being ‘clueless’ ‘useless’ ‘not as good as luca’