Member Info for Simon_Said

Lol - Sankeys clearly meant 1.05. I got that price too, great to be able to take advantage of dips when they have no basis. Luckily unlike institutional investors, we aren't forced to sell at inopportune moments by outside factors (well, that can happen do individuals, but not PI's as a whole).

Yep I've just bought a decent chunk. My enquiries this morning have found no fundamental cause for this, and have to stick to principles of fundamental value.

Depends on how you look at it Luckyman. These big fund movements can create artificial price movements which, for an investor with a longer time horizon, are a huge benefit. You can get a dip like this for no fundamental reason, allowing cheap access to shares, and then when the price corrects you've got a clear benefit.

Trades don't show any great exodus, looks like probably a single party unloading. That can be for a million reasons. They're not actually drilling/testing right now at West Newton, so seems unlikely to me this is a sign of a news leak!

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/RBD/14244832.html

Thanks Mick, my mistake. Bear in mind though that presentation appears to be a total NPV, the new number is NPV10 (i.e. includes a discount rate).

Anyway, healthy numbers. Looking forward to seeing the real cashflow from all this. Certainly the heightened oil price and stronger dollar (i.e. weaker pound) are useful headwinds for this program.

As Jack says, today's numbers are not '20% below April projections' as these were for 3 wells only and April's nav was for the whole field.

And if they were able to generate this kind of resource from these first 3, imagine what they'll do with the rest of the field development - especially given their costs are now halved from 100% to 50%.

Juicy.

I have no idea what this bloke is looking for as a reply. Some arbitrary share price goals?

Welcome to the board Topbrewer. The price has roughly doubled from where it was when a large number of us were building our initial positions, and has stood up well in times when AIM has struggled. Very few people here complaining.

We know from the Vox interview that Reabold's California interests are now self-funding, which is a massive clue that the cash being generated is highly significant. It's all very well to throw caution on NPV10 (the 10 being a 10% annual discount rate), but it's abundantly clear that these operations are profitable and throwing off cash.

The key part is this: 'Economics can essentially double'. This is because going forward, Reabold are only liable for 50% of expenditure, down from almost 100%. It seems people are failing to understand what that means!

They can now just continue to spud wells, with the data learned from the pilot wells, and fully exploit the now proven reserves. This is massive. Given Reabold's status as non-operator, and the fact that this project now self-funds via cash generated, this is essentially just a free money machine for Reabold. It's a brilliant bit of investing by the BoD.

"Additional prospectivity associated with other potential drilling locations at West Brentwood, along with "Probable" and "Possible" upsides, have not been included in the valuation calculation."

Indeed...

Sankeys you are just wrong, I don't know why you keep repeating. CPR is mainly using downhole data including cores taken from the last drill. It is separate and different to a flow test.

As for your even more ridiculous that the EWT is more important, you just don't seem to understand appraisal drilling. The key is to build evidence about the viability of the entire license area, not just the one little well they're presently testing. The EWT is to test that well. The CPR is to assess data across the license area. One was already produced by Connaught before this drill. Why does a second CPR require flow data when the first didn't?

You ignore each time Denia and I correct you, so I guess you're just another troll. What a strange vocation.

Ugh stupid LSE! Try this... https://twitter.com/ReaboldPLC/status/1176091792871235589

For those who had technical trouble with the Vox interview, it has now been fixed and is well worth a watch. ****************************/media/5d889395906f7c001bea5fd3/?context=/listings/LON/RBD/multimedia/

Indeed, an astonishing amount to happen between now and Christmas on multiple fronts. They'll certainly be spending plenty on RNS releases!

Indeed, 'provisional CPR' is a tautological phrase. The whole point of a CPR is to be provisional, to assess the play in order to produce independent data to help companies involved in the project, as well as prospective would-be financiers/participants, assess its viability and scale.

The current CPR being worked on is using many forms of downhole data from the recent drill, including core samples. It will be completed imminently. There is no reason why CPR or EWT be in any particular order - they are testing different things, or rather assessing different data.

I can't wait till either is released so this daft debate ends!

Yes.

Just to follow on, I think some people have to shift their thinking a bit. The key in an appraisal like this is to prove up a prospect/license area. The focus on flow rates is not always helpful, as all those measure is flow from a single well, and any single well could encounter any number of technical/operational issues which do not necessarily mean the entire play is instantly devalued.

The CPR takes into account various data to assess the project as a whole, not simply a narrow view of a single well. Of particular note is that the previous CPR, crucially, did not use core samples (because none had been taken!). This one is thus completely different.

It's natural to all want to see big BOPD numbers, but remember that this is an appraisal project and far too large for the current partners to fully take to market. Thus what we're really engaged in here is building up a convincing enough set of data in order to sell the interest on. CPR is a part of that. Flow rate data is another part of that. These are all parts of the glossy brochure we're building to sell this on.

adouble, that's not correct. CPRs are routinely done without flow data - indeed, this is a 'revised' CPR, the original one was before the drill and thus clearly before flow data.

CPRs take into account all the available data to give risk-weighted assessments of a proposed project. There are no fixed rules on what those data points need to be.

In the case of West Newton, the CPR will land before flow data, as they have plenty of information from the present and previous drills on the license in order to come to a useful assessment. It is a priority to get the CPR published, as it will be used to attract funding for additional drilling, to support the share prices of the partner companies (critical in case any of them need to raise), and most importantly will help entice majors to put in an early bid for the project.

True, but the 40 bopd is irrelevant really. I look at it as a smart alternative to temporarily pausing the well. Better to keep decent cashflow from 40 bopd until they reformulate the site to full capacity over the next few weeks.

Come on Lucky, this isn't your first week on AIM!

Well it also does the opposite sometimes, with random rises on small trades.

The reason isn't anything underhanded - it's just that you are only seeing the trades, not the order book behind it all. Tip of the iceberg, when most is underneath.

The real criticism of AIM is more that - even L2 doesn't tell you a huge amount, it's very opaque.