Member Info for Soundingoff

We really don't have a clue do we Davey. Either way it's quite a coincidence. Maybe we're having to staple those ducks to the floor to get them into line.

Thanks for the calculations Lewis. It's good that we have clarity on where the basis for the calculations lie; it broadly fits in with our current thinking. We were advised that there was likely to be a link to oil prices and that's what we've got; we are now open to Brent price fluctuations. Forecasts for 2020 onwards vary, so it'll be down to the interpretation of a seller. Though we have to bear in mind we are looking at a production period of more than 10 years and so we would expect some fluctuations during that period.

What we must also consider is this reduces risk considerably for a purchaser and there's now the argument to value on an NPV8 basis, which would broadly uplift our NPV by 20%. We also have the connected GOIP improvements which were communicated in the March RNS.

Isn't it funny that we have finally got the coiled tubing on site (a rather common bit of kit) and we've also received a non-binding offer letter in the space of a few hours.

Shed- It's pretty irrelevant, but for the record I have no issue with practically everything you've posted. I don't agree with some of it, but that's what this board is for, as long as it's genuine, as you are. For what it's worth, I don't think what you've posted since really fits with your original comment and so, in some way explains the frustration you note. Hopefully we are on the home straight :)

Slightly off topic Jag, but I don't see the ultimate potential rewards in SDX that I do here. Egypt, gas rates, Government take etc. Very different investment proposition, so I was more focused on the SP there. Though for full disclosure, I have bought back some at 30p. It's massively undervalued, but then so much of the market it at the moment. Your patience in SDX will be rewarded IMO.

And it's your right to question that the remuneration appears indulgent, Shed. Especially given our cash situation.
But to assess our Board are toads or something worse? That requires information you are not privy to, and in all honesty suggests you think something dishonest is happening. Do you really think that? The salaries appear market rate, so if you don't like the market...

We don't have a clue what is going on at the moment and normally I would change my investment in that company. I did just that with SDX last year and luckily didn't participate in the almost 50% drop in the SP that resulted. We have already been warned of what to expect and it appears to be playing out as advised- coiled tubing doesn't take 4 months to arrive. TE10 appears complicated enough on its own without our stated aim to sell. It may be a blessing or a curse, but I've been around companies looking to sell and the added complexities are significant. Everything you do/decision you make no longer has one purpose, it usually has at least two.

I keep seeing the same error posted- Brian's salary has not doubled in 2018 compared with 2017. The remuneration report only shows remuneration for the directors from their date of appointment. Therefore all we know is that for roughly 6 months of 2017, Brian received remuneration of £195K. For the 2018 calendar year 2018, he received £323K.

And shockingly, I agree with trellis with regards to how can we assess whether our Board deserve their salaries in 2018, as arguably it all hangs on TE10, the flow test outcome and our sale. It's sad to see a post calling the Board toads being recommended so much, but I suppose that's better than doing a bit of research into what is the market rate is for those individuals working in O&G.

I'm sure JJ would be happy to be called cunning (though probably not the second word), but I'm afraid it's just basic accounting to include those items as cash. Items such as the guarantee which we have fulfilled by drilling TE10.

- Page 9 suggests news around the AGM
- Page 15 has a new/more detailed breakdown of the 34 TCF model

Wh0s- The problem is that our development concept is based on stimulation. Therefore it may be price sensitive but could create a false market. Again something a nomad needs to take into consideration. Let’s face it, only post stim rates really matter.

Indeed Barry, emotion is a dangerous thing with investing. Your posting therefore concerns me. You're like a greedy little excited child at Easter, posting misinformation to try and grab as much chocolate as you can. I hope you really have read the books you suggest and have a guaranteed stop on your short, otherwise you could be in a huge mess in the near future.

One of their best assets is the Rovuma basin in Mozambique, which spawned the Cove Energy story.

That is a fair point Jones. Though looking back at the RNS releases, the information released differs somewhat. It took around eight weeks to release the final verdict on TE8. I'm not sure how delayed that really was, but we are now on double that for TE10. Thankfully, in communication terms we have moved on from that.

'@SO - proper O&G companies don't deliberately prove up their assets as slowly as they can. They get on with the fking job.'

Are we proving them up as slowly as possible? I presume you must be on the Sound board to have that knowledge?

"Negotiation" is a legitimate reason is it? As if a O&G major will be bamboozled by JP's strategy into paying more for Tendrara because we won't tell them the flow rates in a normal timeframe. Christ almighty.

I've negotiated a few deals and that's one of your basic plays. So yes, any comments?

DaveySanchez- Surprised not ""amazed"", and it was more a dig at wh0sthedaddy who has followed it up with the 'wages' comment. It's all a conspiracy you see, Schlumberger are happy for JP to sit around earning his extortionate wages. Very funny and says a lot about the poster.

Why slow things down? Technical reasons on TE10, seismic interpretation, negotiation, even TE11 planning. There could be lots of reasons why there is a delay. However we are in partnership with Schlumberger and ONHYM. To suggest the delay is anything other than genuine and a required pause at this stage, is rather conspiratorial.

Personally I'm still surprised people think this delay is due to poor planning rather than being engineered by design.

The chances of success at TE10 are increasing by the day for me given how quickly we announced failure at TE9 and moved on to TE10. The silence from TE11 is deafening. Still some way to go though and there are multiple scenarios that could play out with TE10 and subsequent activity.

Unfortunately it's all a bit of a pantomime at the moment. Clearly anyone shouting duster has no more idea than the rest of us.

TE9 bad news was announced immediately and there was no time given for debate or questioning. TE10 is different and for whatever reason, Sound have cut the communication cycle. My personal view is that this move is a good one, for a number of reasons. But on a personal level it gives those who want to play the game less ammunition.

The real reason is unknown, but I think it's fair to say TE10 is a complex puzzle which is key to unlocking our value. Shouting duster is frankly, rather pathetic and not the words of an investor.

We can never be certain given the facts at hand, but we can assume with some satisfaction that institutional purchases make up a significant percentage of the trading during the period since we first had 'good news' on TE10. And therefore are not insignificant as you surmise.

We then of course have to follow it further. Why are they buying when PIs are selling? Do they know anything we don't know? What value do they put on our company? I have in the back of my mind another elusive 'promise', the Edison report providing a full company valuation. Is the draft floating around in the City?

Anyway, enough positivity for one day.

You certainly don't trellis. My estimation is based on facts ;)

'People grasp at a very small % increase in IIs,'

Some facts are useful at at time like this trellis. If we look at trade volume between the January '19 Sound quarterly update and the latest one, a rough calculation shows that around 40% of all trades relate to IIs purchasing shares. Clearly a guesstimation and it could be higher or lower than this, but to suggest it is not significant would be remiss of a diligent investor. Letting your emotions cloud your judgement is dangerous at the best of times, but now we need facts rather than throwaway comments such as those in your post.

Ponkey is not making an assumption, they are ISA trades. They sell and buy back at a small premium, so both show as sells.

The trading plan will not transact at this rate. It would require considerable cash into the plan (from JP) to purchase the options and he would end up with one month's salary of extra shares. A pointless exercise.