Member Info for Soundingoff

As I have posted plenty of times n4a, just because you can calculate a NAV figure, doesn't mean you'll get that in a deal or even get a deal.

It's one thing ranting and throwing insults at the BOD, but please stop misleading people with your posting.

n4a- You know full well that balance sheet value is not the same as NAV. Our NAV based on standard broker methodology (calculated by me using that criteria) is £1+. Not long to go now, switch off and try and get your life back.

That information was already on public record ddboy. However, today the issued share capital has been doubled from 100 to 200 shares. You'd usually do this when you are readying a business to make changes to the ownership structure.

Because this would give ammunition to the traders/others looking to make money at the expense of the PI. Plus there may not just be one deadline, but a series. And sometimes deadlines change.

As you state, you're not close enough to it anymore, which of course is a precarious position to post from. We have been advised relatively recently that there were more than 10 parties interested and being marketed to. Of course whether that turns into a bid/bids is another matter.

Indeed a bidder can act how they wish. However I see no reason why there is not a price that an interested party(s) would bid at, and the sale of other fields confirms your suggestions are too low. Our horst development has Government support, there are in-country gas requirements, high gas prices, it's onshore and with good links to Europe. Most of the development requirements are in place. Why wouldn't the asset sell at the right price? And why wouldn't there be multiple bidders? There have been recent gas assets sales with lesser potential and greater hurdles to overcome.

'I say this, if the Sound assets were.marketable someone would be in by now with a 15-20p offer which is a 100-150% premium which I believe most would take. I'm sorry but I just dont see it happening.
If it were me, I'd see better chances in the likes of Eco or Hur for restoration of capital loss as eve though SP's are much higher if their good news continues they can be more sure of 3 or 4 bagging than I think is likely here.'

I'm afraid the use of a 'premium' won't work here in the way you suggest. In O&G, as long as the company isn't distressed (Sound isn't right now, and has shown it can raise cash), you need to make an offer in relation to NPV. A strong position would result in a premium to NPV and vice versa. Using recent sales of fields for reference, your valuation would be based on a fire sale of just the Horst, ignoring the rest of the assets.

I'd imagine because once the company in question replied to the posting, it was deemed to be advertising? Or maybe they thought it better to remove the postings altogether?

I don’t think Crude is too bothered he has an internet stalker. Lucky for you with the accusations!

I think you must have posted under the wrong account Pontcanna, as given how much you post, you would know Crude has posted multiple times over the last week.

As mebo has noted, Crude posted at the time he was selling some shares to pay off his mortgage.

N4A- If you believe your analysis has any merit (in the context of O&G), then please do some research on valuing such companies before investing further in the sector.

As you suggest jnewton, from an auditing perspective, this would be on the basis of reasonable expectation of a sale. i.e. there are no reasons to suggest a buyer/deal to continue couldn't be found.

The 6 month accounts aren't audited, but they are prepared on the same basis. I also found the line interesting:

'These conditions indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which, were it not for the expected funding due from the marketing process'

Jones/Neptunes- You're a rather creepy chap. What with this and your stalking of Crudehope.

It's a standard note and we all know we don't have cash to be here in a year's time without a fundraise. What a pointless comment. That was never the plan.

It looks like your rant that we'd spent all the cash was once again completely wrong.

Unsurprisingly, there are no hidden problems as suggested by some on here, including raising cash because we had none left...

£11m 'cash' at the end of June 19, with admin costs of £4m for the 6 months. As we know, the admin costs dropped in August and will again end of year if required. So there is no issue with short term funding. If we drill again after end of year, then clearly they may need to look at finance.

So once again, we wait.

I'm sure we all remember Jez and Simon's diabolical behaviour, posting complete lies to try and get some cheap shares. Was that after Badile or TE8? Either way, rather pathetic.

N4A- Do you not appreciate that plenty of O&G fields take many failed drills to unlock them? That doesn't mean Eastern Morocco will be unlocked successfully, but we have been advised the data still supports significant development potential. And those involved in the marketing process appear to agree given Brian's comments and the fact they are still continuing the process. No one can dispute we haven't met our targets, but it's laughable that there are posters on here who think they know more than the O&G profession.

Didn't you know it's all made up Longwait? A conspiracy right up to the King of Morocco. He has no interest in the assets of his country.

Unfortunately it's yet more moronic posting. The author knows it and even has to hide behind another alias to post it.

Just noticed it on the calendar, so confirmed:

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/AN_1568301683663214800/uk-earnings-trading-statements-calendar---next-7-days.aspx

Has this been confirmed to you R.Soul or are you just surmising?