Member Info for WhichWayNow

In simplistic terms, it’s the equivalent of the Highways Agency publishing details of expected roadworks. As a road user, you are then warned and can make an appropriate choice. There is a similar system for aircraft (NOTAMs). In all cases it’s gover providing a coordination function to advise users. Those that use them know how they work, and the usage here seems entirely appropriate. They not there to advise computer addicts sat in France. And I can’t believe that you distracted somebody with an important job simply to satisfy your ‘infuriation’.

And you’re still a hypocrite.

So what I don’t understand is why you’re so infuriated when you have no idea how the system works. And why you’ve effectively accused the Captain of the AM of negligence in his duties based on an AIS track (I suspect you don’t understand that technology either) viewed from the safety of your computer. The equivalent in your world is some desk jockey criticising your drilling technique from 1000 mile distance and with no experience. You should be ashamed of the hypocrisy you’ve displayed this weekend.

ADUK

Still talking things down I see.

I take it you fully understand the Admirality’s role for RNWs?

Snagged. Have a look at the wind direction. If there is a better place to shelter, and have a rested, relaxed crew, then I can’t picture it.

There has been some truly ridiculous speculation on here from very little info.

If you want to see the potential value of ship watching have a look at Amnesiac's analysis of the Wick drill on the UPL board. Simple provision of facts based on detailed research, as opposed to WAGs and panic displayed here.

"Most here are not the snowflake generation, 24/7 on their phones and expecting constant reassurance."

Made me smile.....

The DTG on the Admirality warning notice is from 0830 Z this morning. It is just paperwork submitted by HUR and/or Bluwaterand, not an indicator of success.

The current company interpretation favours a tilted OWC as the explanation for the differing results achieved during drilling. The CPR accepts this explanation. Ie one puddle not two. However, there is a possible sealing fault identified and there is a possibility that lateral connectivity in the reservoir is not complete. If a sealing fault proved to be the reason for the differing OWC then, in theory, the oil in place could be greater than published figures. (Ie the Halifax puddle would be bigger) As Genghis suggests, the company would like to collect data to refine their model. This is one of the uncertainties that needs to be cleared up in appraisal.

Interesting take on climate change effects!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46345280

Outstanding results!

I’m invested here although I have reduced my holding over recent weeks. Why? Because as RicFle is trying to highlight, the company is over-promising and under delivering on the tempo of drilling. That doesn’t mean they will not get there in the end, it means they are not managing expectations.

And the reason to articulate this, even if invested, is to be honest and to not use these forums for simply ramping/de-ramping.

GLA. There is slot of promise here despite the market turmoil.

BOPD

You live in Parana, you've already told us that. So ballpark you are 1000km from the HMI mine which is targeting local producers in Minas Gerais state. If you actually had a farm, it's no wonder the economics didn't work well given the transport difficulties and cost.

Blueclyde If you look at the actual figures in the CPR then you will see what you are saying is incorrect. The figures are probabilistic, not an average.

Company cash flow prediction for 2019 is $47m. This matches farm in costs and assumes FOIL is on 30 Jun. This assumes POO of $70. The cash flow for FOIL on 1 Jan is $180m. And the POO is around $80. And 1 Jan implies some potential contingent cash available. So there is a huge difference in available cash depending on the date of FOIL. And at the moment HUR are rightly planning publicly on 30 Jun, but no doubt planning quietly for FOIL in Jan.

He's already declared he (supposedly) lives 2 states away in Parana. Probably 1000km. Harvest Minerals is targeting far closer to their locality in MG.

Bopd

It's probably around 1000km from PR to MG, depending where in the state you are. HMI have been clear that they are focussed on the local MG market, surely delivering to you would be ridiculously expensive and time consuming.

MissDosh As ever you post very interesting info. Do you share the posters enthusiasm? And price targets?

From the Evening Standard:

The scientist quoted as the source of Katla's imminent explosion has said she is "exasperated" by the reports that stemmed from her new study - the core of which was really that Katla is one of the world's most prominent natural sources of CO2 emissions.

She tweeted that she told the Sunday Times "the severity of Eyjafjallajökull air traffic disruption was very unusual and unlikely to happen if Katla erupts... And still - @thesundaytimes quote me as saying exactly the opposite!"

ADUK

The 'normal' way of raising money in such cases is to tap existing IIs. They have the most to lose and if the MCAP at the time was circa £5-600m, then we're talking a low percentage raise. Later comments suggest CA did eventually stump up, but I can't recall how much and at what price.

Regarding the warrants, I sold, so didn't 'lose'. However, if my assertion is correct and they adversely affected confidence and ultimately the placing price, then LTHs were affected, although burned is probably too strong a term. Simply put, if they could have got away with issuing 100m less shares, then all things being equal, the SP would have been proportionally higher now.

I do realise this is touching on a sensitive subject for some investors, but I'm simply offering my own opinion and am not looking to get drawn in to wider disagreements. And I agree there is no point in endlessly replaying events of previous years.

AS said 'slug of equity'. But he also talked extensively regarding FO. So it depends what you hear, as Sipp mentions. I appreciated his candour, but I don't think we've heard from him since in a publicity piece, so I suspect the BoD were not pleased, and we know some large II weren't.

He did do well to get such a large fundraise away. This was never a certainty, look at BCN struggles at the moment. Where I do think he should be criticised is for the warrants. This was at the same time as the run-in to funding. IMHO, it lowered the eventual placing price and led to increased dilution. For a relatively small amount of money he should have looked for other sources.

So the BoD have had there moments, more good than bad - and there is nothing wrong with remembering that.