Member Info for Skippysb01

No that's not a good analogy.

This is a better analogy:

Go home and turn your water off at the mains. Leave it for a few hours.

Turn the mains back on.

Now turn on your tap and see what happens. After a small period of time the water flows but it didnt for the full period.

Now time how long it takes to fill a one litre bottle of water and turn off the tap.

Is your flow rate 1 litre of water a day or is the daily flow rate the 24 hours divided by the time it took to fill your 1 litre bottle of water?

Whilst this analogy is somewhat trite it is at least relevant and demonstrates how you extrapolate valid outcomes from limited data.

Last seen having sumptuous Chinese dinner. A number 1 if I recall.

6bopd is also not the outcome from the data.

It's a valid point.

But blimey - it is SOOOOO obvious these people are not real but actors with a very very clear purpose. They appear on all of the message boards. Often you can identify very clear language and syntax that demonstrates an individual with many accounts. This one is very familiar.

No they stated quite clearly what the flow rate was based on the data and valid assumptions. You just picked 4 conveniently as a position in the data that suits your objective and bias. It is not the outcome of the data.

Yes that's right Olderwiser. And so this - 'The SMD-B flow test was concluded with sufficient information for the next steps'

Any form of testing requires extrapolating results from a dataset. It is never to run permanent sustainable outcomes. You can debunk any test outcome with your approach.

As you put it - the viability can be calculated!

No it really does. You have assumed that they made a decision to stop before achieving 'sustainable flows' when in fact they stopped when the test had completed the companies objectives. This opinion is bias. It means a lot.

Olderwiser 'the decisions to stop before achieving sustainable flow, answers every question an investor needs to know'. Again - an opinion with no basis but to achieve the agenda driven bias.

From the company: ‘The SMD-B flow test was concluded with sufficient information for the next steps, and the data recorded will assist 88E in optimisation and design processes in the next phase of advancement of Project Phoenix.’

But your opinion has no basis in data. You have extrapolated an opinion to fit the data rather than extrapolated from the data to build a model of the potential. You can accuse the company on 'spin' if you want to but it's hard to see how 88e could release any option without you choosing to address it in a negative way.

Investors do need to be aware. This is a high risk investment. BUT you do need to be wary of wise men bringing strong opinions which meet an end - its not being done for our benefit. You have no reason to post on this board other than to try to influence the SP. Clearly the hundreds and perhaps thousands of posts you have created have an agenda otherwise there is no reason to do it. Unless you are mad - which you are not.

Olderwiser 'How much credibility does a company still have after the flow test RNS debacle'.

The 'debacle' is a manufactured fantasy, largely pushed by you. The company published legitimate data on the flow rate that point to a potential commercial discovery and are now seeking JV partners.

Surely if punters are happy to trade at the current SP then that's just a market that works. Sorry but I just cannot see any manipulation whatsoever. That's quite a claim and would require some very strong evidence. Looks like a market waiting for news to me.

So far today there is 1 post on the PANR message board. 43 posts on this board and a significant proportion of those refer to PANR.

They are clearly going for the JV for Hickory. Shows confidence.

Well Toffers. it aint going bust in the next 12 months because they are raising 12 months working capital right now. So no they won't go bust and I think you will find that isnt what is in anyones best interests.

Nope, the latest well test results show that the asset is likely potentially commercial. This requires commercial engagement with prospective partners. But you can read so you know that.

Nobody can state that an AIM company will not need to raise further funds. However the essence of your posts are not factual but based open your inability to see further than your need for PANR to be a success and you see 88e as a threat (it isnt). Not very grown up or worth reading.

I just checked over at the PANR and counted 2 messages posted today. One of them mentions 88e. It seems that PANR investors are far far more interested in 88e.

I wish PANR investors the very best because I'm not a massive man child baby that needs to post negative stuff on a rival company message board.

The RNS clearly states what the 5m is for and it isnt just 'survey in Namibia'.

It does include funding for a farm out provider process and ongoing operational costs for 12 months.

Yes it is wise to get out if you feel that way. It is ultra high risk.

The vast majority of anyones portfolio should not be in AIM. It is the 'shot at nothing' to give it snooker analogy.

I saw the 'buy out burgundy' theory from Oilman Jim on X. The RNS would need to state clearly if the funds were to buy out Burgundy and it doesn't. However, the RNS does include the following with regard to Project Phoenix:

'· Project Phoenix, Alaska: Following the successful flow testing at the Hickory-1 discovery well, 88 Energy will be focused on:

o Completing post-well testing and analysis at Hickory-1;

o Securing a contingent resource for the SFS and SMD reservoirs;

o Commencing a formal farm-out process to attract a high-quality new partner to fund the next stage of appraisal and development; and

o Advance planning and design of a early stage production system.'

Note 'attract a high quality new partner'. Could be more here that would support Oilmans Jims view should a new partner want to remove any other party? But I doubt via this raise today.

Investment at this stage depends on whether you believe they are telling the truth about the latest flow test and how attractive they are to the industry.

When all of the flak on a message board is from tribal views from those weak enough to need to deramp a rival company..... well I consider those views not worth knowing.

Maybe those long term investors are not concerned with the short term SP movement and are prepared to wait this out and build positions in the event that progress is made towards commercial realisation.

Trust me when I say with regard to the day to day SP movement. It isnt us - it's you.

Frankly on AIM, just the prospect that punters have to wait for longer than a few months for the next news is enough to half the share price. It doesnt have much to do with what the prospects actually are. This investment is actually somewhat de risked after the latest well tests.