The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Precisely. Which is why the Royston post discovery interviews by PB stating it’s ‘as good as it gets’ and can be trucked etc etc etc is all BS. All very similar to coho in terms of the drip fed downgrades.
PB now has a reputation as a BSer. There was no need for the hyperbole at all. Let’s hope Cascadura comes good for him and us. However any negative news on Royston will definitely be seen as withheld information by me. TBH I just need to cut my position as the warning lights have been red for a while.
Hey John, I’ve reread the RNS so accept it wasn’t guidance but PB definitely talked up the initial test results. I suppose my point is that the 11.8MMCF guidance was subject to PB’s usual optimism as seen in the results (Coho-1 well averaged net volumes of 4.2 MMcf/d ).
I’ve been here a long time as many of us have since the Cascadura discovery but am increasingly wary and suspicious of the delay in Royston test results.
Fingers crossed for positive news on first gas at Cas.
Initial test results were in the 17,5 to 20 MMCF range. This was shared by PB on various post discovery interviews. Might also be work looking at how they RNSd the discovery ( titled TOUCHSTONE ANNOUNCES COHO 1 GAS test of 17.5MMCF).
I agree they subsequently guided 10MMCF after extended testing. Does 4.6-4.8MMCF a 50 % decrease seem on guidance?
Hi John delays to Royston feel wrong to me. I also feel that Cascadura production guidance can’t now be trusted. It really comes down to PB’s behaviour and constant misleading on timeframe.
You may have missed the chinook RNS titles SIGNIFICANT NATURAL GAS DISCOVERY AT CHINOOK (14th October 2020) ……..
All im saying is that Royston feels like a chinook to me right now. I hope I’m
Proved wrong.
Unfortunately due to CEOs constant moving of the goal posts I am now beginning to doubt flow rates. I’m heavily invested so hope I’m wrong but something feels wrong to me. Coho is a clear example of PB relationship with the truth. Started as 18-20MMCF then expectations on production lowered to 10MMCF. In recent interim results producing 4.6MMCF daily….….
Providing Cascadura production is inline with guidance and Royston can flow circa 350-400 BOPD I think we will see value out.
However the issue with PB , especially after chinook is that until production figures are released it’s hard to believe any guidance. He can’t even give an approximate padded timeframe to the market !
PB seems to enjoy using the phrase “near term”. I’d rather he added padding and met his self declared timelines. Timings can shift but this close to first gas he should be able to provide accurate guidance based on sequence of events!
I’m here for the Long term in any case, but PB really needs to up his game.
At this point after the rig move to casc B site interrupting testing we are all just waiting in anticipation. I must admit that if potential flow rates are non commercial I will feel this has all to a certain extent been orchestrated to protect the share price. Eg align negative news with Cascadura first gas.
How can they conceivably take this long to test the intermediate zone ? Even an initial indication of flow rates with cautionary statement regarding the need for a long term test period (90-120 days) would seem normal. I do feel we will get positive news but doubt are creeping in after the last Royston ramp for PB and chinook PR. What is their to test after the initial first 7 days? Surely if a dud they would have announced by now?
The company really need to improve their comms and ability to set expectations on realistic time frames!
Janedoe it looks like 2024 for cas C if successful to be connected as a producer to the gas facilities. However Paul stated he sees the rig being ready to drill cas B and C (likely back to back) in august/September 2023. If successful we are then looking at the hook up timeframe of mid 2024.
Royston testing ongoing now and 400-500 BOPD would be very commercial result. This would then unlock potential to drill many more wells and get some very welcome reserves. Little in the SP for Royston as things stand today. Oil can be trucked so can hit the bottom line immediately without the need for pipelines first.
Interesting wording in the RNS. Does this indicate an expectation that the second test will flow at commercial rates and a likely requirement for it to go on long term test to establish baseline production rates? Any feedback from those more technical in the O&G field welcome. “ As each test will be performed independently, we expect a number of months of testing upon commencement of the second test. “ We will update the market when results become available."
RNS seems to confirm initial talks underway with PEXA group australian listed with 2.42bn AUD market cap. Looks like a strategic fit with their platform businesses. Could easily see a £40m buyout. DYOR
If the intention was to not retain the rig on-site beyond testing the sub thrust sheet then this should have been communicated. Stating that testing would commence in April with no mention of operational constraints due to rig move smacks of very poor planning. Feels like they suddenly decided to be agile with the testing plan? Royston could be a huge asset and moving goal position on results is an own goal. PB needs to improve comms.
If it means they get the rig to work on Royston and don’t waste a dry season to prioritise casca first gas then so be it. Nothing priced in for Royston and it’s a huge potential game changer on top of Cascadura. We can’t plod along to ensure we are self funding. Royston needs expediting so we can frame the size of the prize. I am concerned about the teams operational capabilities after coho but prepared to give the benefit of the doubt.