Member Info for Simon_Said

Many of us have bemoaned that Parta was never priced into the SP, so it's no surprise that what barely counts as a delay (there were slides already showing it as possibly Q1 '19) didn't have a sustained downward impact. All you saw was traders pre-emptively sell on 'bad news' hoping for a sly trade.

In truth this was an RNS telling us that Parta is now fully permitted and arranged - which was something that trolls were previously using against it, saying it's taken too long and there must be a permitting problem. Well now their isn't and we know it's happening. And in case anyone's forgotten, these drills are on a site already known to be productive that was only not tapped because of country conditions at the time.

And until then we have multiple California wells and Wick now looking set for next month. Whether something slips from Q4 to Q1 isn't of great concern to me - I'd rather it didn't happen, but that's a normal risk in O&G investing and I don't need to sell these any time soon. What's important to me apart from drilling is the administrative milestones that enable it, such as the RNS today.

Regarding our new resident troll, I merely invite anybody taking him seriously to look back at his past posts and responses. Every time a point of his is deconstructed he simply abandons it and finds one single piece of wording in the repliers post to point to for a fresh attack, hoping you'll forget all the points he's been comprehensively debunked on. And now he resorts to the lamest BB troll cliche of them all, 'you can't take my realism'. It's a rhetorical device of the sixth-form debating society calibre, where the implication is that only the pontificating party's proclamations are to be considered 'realistic' and anything else is not - even if all they are doing is casting a negative spin on the same unknowns. Or in this troll's case, generally just showing themselves as poorly researched and getting things flat-wrong.

Of course all he's doing now is making bland negative comments that lack even sufficient substance to usefully refute. They don't really have any meaning.

Ah Persimmon, our other fake 'investor'.

You continue to unmask yourself as a fake 'investor'. Why would somebody invested keep coming here to spew misleading negative nonsense? This is my last response to you as I think your plot is to clog up the board and you are too stupid to warrant any more of my time.

'It was not me that stated the California well costs could come from production, it was RBD! So take it up with them, as they are "just wrong".'

This isn't what was said. They suggested that in time as more wells came online, they would begin to pay for future ones. You are demanding it after the workovers come online and the first well isn't even in full production?

Pull the other one.

Oh wow it gets worse.

'Lets have names and dates' - I am not copy-pasting all the investor presentations, RNS's and Reabold website information on here. Do your own research you lazy creature.

'Where are your numbers? Where is the "crossover point"? Why is self funding, not relevant?' - What numbers? Saying 'where are the numbers' isn't an argument, it is funny how you think that has meaning. The reason this is not relevant is that the company has sufficient cash to cover drilling expenses, and the wells will be very very profitable in time because they were cheap to drill. This information is all freely available, the fact that I won't go back to every presentation and RNS to paste it here for you doesn't make me wrong, it makes you a lazy and deliberately misleading idiot.

'"Meanwhile the other assets are all near-term and will bring in rapid revenue." Lets have names and dates? Or is it yet another line of BS?'

Crikey. Same nonsense.

Read some actual information from the company on its projects. Instead of just demanding other people spoon feed you and they insisting they are 'wrong' if they quite reasonably can't be bothered. You are so, so bad at this, it's cringe worthy.

The cash was raised for current production and for new projects. They have sufficient cash reserves for both.

And he's right, production revenue does not need to come up in time to cover drilling cost, they have cash for that.

You are just wrong.

Oh look more nonsense from the fake 'invested' poster (or 'invited' as-per your post).

Either you are pretending to be invested to have a good pointless deramp, or you are a genuine investor and really silly. Putting out daily bashings of your own stock on a popular forum - ah yes, the true making of riches. Lol. Let's not pretend this is some perfect impartial paradise eh? This is an investor's forum, we all know the game.

As for your actual 'points', I just see a lot of negative speculation based on a very partial picture.

The current BOPD rates are really not terribly relevant. VG-3 has only just come online and the facilities to maximise its oil and gas extraction are in their infancy. But we know they are targeting 200 barrels of oil and 60 thousand cubic feet of gas per day. They are currently expanding the site and preparing it for additional drilling, likely 2 more wells. These will be a lot faster to come online than the first one, as the site is being prepared in advance as both a drilling and a production facility.

Meanwhile the other assets are all near-term and will bring in rapid revenue.

The exact crossover point where US income covers US drilling expenses is really not very interesting or relevant. We have no idea what production rates all of Reabold's various interests will achieve until they are drilled.

This is a really asinine, pinickity little argument.

As for your silly point about the share price, you were called out for simply choosing a spike for your example and then using the current dip, which is caused by the entire stock market dipping and some small delays spurring itchy traders, to exacerbate it.

You have an obvious agenda and nobody believes your 'I'm totally invested' point. Indeed, perhaps we think you're too clever to be invested whilst posting this rubbish. But my apologies if I'm wrong, and you are in fact invested and merely self-hating.

As for 'a trader would have made more off this share' - well that depends how they timed their buys and sells, doesn't it. Again, you arrange your comments in whatever light is the most negative and then claim this is somehow 'balanced'! Ha.

I strongly encourage people here to contact Bango directly. They are very responsive and Ray often responds directly. In my recent communications they all sound extremely confident and very much itching to prove their point about upcoming route migrations in the pipeline. The impression I get is they see this as the execution phase that they've been gearing up for over a number of years.

Lol what are you on about?

He said 'if they meet forecasts'. How else can that be worded? He can't say 'when', that would be silly.

I have nothing against you but this is a really silly point.

Lol how could it not be 'if'? It's a forecast. What on earth do you expect?

That might be the silliest comment I've ever read on LSE. And that's saying something.

Very easy to call something a 'pump' without actually addressing any of the points made.

Happily holding.

The near-term EUS pipeline of $4bn hasn't gone anywhere and the rapid growth means the MCap is in no way problematic. You really can't exclude that from your calculations. They would have turned profit this year had they not bought Audiens and that's already going to turn cash-positive in the next period.

This company has spent years gearing up for this phase via extremely heavy reinvestment of revenue, and they are extremely well lined up to make significant profit. I am holding.

NPVs were at $55 oil. They are getting close to Brent prices which are currently hovering around $80. That is +45%!

*blurting

'mainly workover drilling' So you are still writing long posts without doing any research then. The workovers are the smallest part of the California campaign. The vast majority is fresh drilling. Your repetition of the 'californians wouldn't let Reabold have good oil fields, they're not stupid' doesn't make it any less of a completely simplistic and asinine point that has already been corrected for you multiple times here. I have also seen you whining about getting angry responses to your repetitive nonsense posting. Toughen up lad. And stop blurring the same stuff. Do some actual research. Not just 5 seconds then enjoying the sound of your own voice. You continue to completely misunderstand the California campaign and keep repeating the same things. But don't worry Persimmon will save you.

reabold@camarco.co.uk is the address. I've always gotten responses.

Camarco is the PR company, you will most likely get a reply from James Crothers.

For anyone interested, they've been out in Indonesia courting developers.

https://bango.com/news/press-releases/post/bango-nexus-jakarta-creating-profitable-developer-and-operator-partnerships

'Ray Anderson, Bango CEO commented: “Bango Nexus events have a history of bringing together industry leaders to discuss and advance the industry. By bringing businesses together and powering e-commerce with unique data-driven insights, Bango delivers new business opportunities and new dimensions of growth for customers around the world. We are pleased to have welcomed so many leading mobile commerce players to the Bango Nexus Jakarta event, and that it proved successful in enabling our partners to thrive.”'

Just to add...

3) The assets weren't 'up for grabs'. S&S had contacts through the oil industry (we often talk about their network of contacts due to their past work) and had private discussions with Gaelic Resources to buy them out. Intriguingly, Stephen shared with me at a previous event that the owners were insistent upon shares rather than cash for the assets, as they were so confident of the success that they wanted to have equity to allow then to benefit from the assets' success. It's a good deal for Gaelic as they are released from having to pay for the wells but get to enjoy the benefits via equity (share price of Reabold going up!).

Analysister I keep seeing you make comments like this, and they're totally wrong. I think you need to research the Reabold business model a bit more to understand how they are finding these deals, and research the Californian plays a bit more to understand these were in no way 'missed' by the US oil industry.

1) These plays are too small for majors who only chase huge oil fields, especially during a time of depressed oil prices (only now recovering). They are the sort of wells and small fields that appeal to juniors, however the oil market disruption has deprived the juniors of funding, and in the US much of the funding that is available heads straight for the lucrative shale/fracking industry, which Reabold isn't participating in.

2) The oil fields that Reabold is participating in via its 100% acquisition of Gaelic Resources all have historic drilling and/or production. To say they have been 'under their noses since the Jurassic age' is simply factually wrong.

It's very clear from your comments here going back that you are trying to make a very silly deramping point about how this is 'too good to be true' without having to bother actually doing any research on the model or the play in question.

Troll harder.

All these unpleasant individuals with unfamiliar names turning up here to gloat. Very distasteful.

I'm sticking with my modest holding here as I like the company and its BoD and the new deal pipeline is sound. You are welcome to disagree and stay away.

In fact the rest of us encourage it.

Lol no **** Sherlock! But that has been getting better and better of late.

The pullback here is actually an impressively muted one compared to the rest of the market in this rout.