Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full video here.
Tiburn - agree BG is key.
Starchild and Tiburn - thanks for excellent posts overnight and a.m.
Jimtheknow - thanks also for your excellent points. I must admit it had occurred to me that perhaps Black and Veach were ultimately responsible for stopping the drill: as you say, we couldn’t risk so much as two molluscs and a Sea Trout being poisoned by a thimbleful of grey water. You are right: that would have been the final, final curtain.
Starchild - thanks as always for an excellent summary - and you are absolutely correct not to reveal the minutiae of a personal telecon, though congrats on being proactive enough to make the call. You are obviously much better mannered than I am in responding to rudeness: I just filter them!
Agreed. Onwards!
PageofCups- hear hear!
P.S. nice intel on the interesting trade: I hope it was you raiding the coffee money tin!
DaProphet - fair enough and I wish you good luck. We have all on this board - particularly we very long term holders - become weary, not from taking chances on the vagaries of the oil industry or the markets (that’s the nature of the beast) - but by suffering the endless twaddle put on by people who have clearly no real interest or knowledge. Thank goodness we do have a few excellent posters. All the best.
NellyB - you forgot one element in your summary: the fact that we did have a Joint Venture Agreement (with Statoil) about ten years ago, but which they pulled out of because if all the other market pressures you mentioned. It just proves that the investment/geological case was as compelling then as it is now. I think you were very gracious to go to such lengths to explain to someone who had clearly done no research of his/her own.
PageofCups - please continue to keep your antenna tuned in: your intel is appreciated!
Starchild and Tiburn - thanks for excellent recent posts, as always. Star: point 4 in your 04:21 post this morning re timing is something I’d not thought about - correct. Tib: you are gracious to try and interact with some posters here, but some are simply not worth wasting your time or intellect on. I’ve been a paid member of ADVFN for 19 years but now hardly ever look in at their chat board as posters like the Si person ruined it. We LTHs who are experienced investors and have seen more twists and turns with this company than have had hot dinners, but who have decided nevertheless to stick it out, must look for the positives. Anyone who has studied the CPRs knows what they are. Anyway, a bit easier now to read through the board as I’ve put several more on filter today.
Starchild – thanks for an excellent post, as always. We have all been hurt to one degree or another, but I really think some of the people on this board would have been better putting their money into a Post Office account or buying premium bonds because they certainly don’t understand real-world, high-risk investing.
EggChaser - now that’s better: a little levity on this board. Heaven knows we need something to cheer us up. Of course I’m not old enough to have heard that song before, ha ha, but love it!
Pacman3311 - quite! Now if we can all just agree a moratorium against anyone replying or debating with that person who posts under a woman’s name but who has already been revealed to be a man by someone who knows him (I refuse ever to dignify the person by giving their name) and also one or two others of a similar ilk - I have them all on filter but can tell they are still goading people), then we should progress nicely. Good Luck All.
ShareScare - Yes, a VERY interesting question that - and I think we all know what the answer might have been!
Pacman3311 - feel free to ‘bang on’! Your line of thinking is the same as mine and a few others on this board and you made some interesting points in your earlier emails (I had not considered the helicopters).
Glide - I don’t think ‘cold feet’ came into it: I think it was a considered decision
Starchild - a great post, thanks as always.
Hopefully the board will be more reasoned from now on: the shorters will all have gone and those at the end of their tether have sold up (which took a lot of guts). So, the only passengers left from the maiden voyage of the Good Ship BPC are those of us in the lifeboat, kept buoyant by the hope of one day seeing the promised land on the horizon (either that or scurvy has driven us all mad). Keep smiling all.
PageofCups - thanks a mill for checking that out. I am very grateful to you. I can't understand why I didn't notice it. Oh well, can't be done without shareholder approval and I think/hope the BoD have more on their minds at present. I have no objections to consolidations in principle: it's just that the timing has to be right from many points of view. All the best. We live to fight another day!
PageofCups - I read every document that ever comes out of the company meticulously, but I cannot recall seeing consolidation ever mentioned. I obviously must have missed it. If you (or any of the others mentioning this subject) can tell me where it was mentioned it would save me trawling through my paperwork, for which I would be very grateful. The notion of consolidation puts the fear of God in me - I have supported this BoD in everything they have done so far (notwithstanding my current tear-making book loss), however I would never, never forgive them doing a consolidation at this time. The theory around consolidation is fine - a simple change of the arithmetic - but every consolidation I have been a part of (a handful over the years) has ended up losing value for the shareholders in the months immediately after consolidation. As I say, simple arithmetics make it look straightforward, but consolidations are in my experience fatal in practice.
GarryG - it’s not a matter of anyone ‘bigging it up’: it is a matter of looking for positives in what ostensibly looks to be a dire situation. Certainly the current share price is dire - and I envy earlier posters whose paper or actual losses are far, far, far less than mine. However, having made the decision to gamble on an AIM oil share - and therefore presumably aware of all the inherent risks - having, at the moment, lost the gamble you either sell up or hold on. I have decided to hold on and therefore for people like me I prefer to err on the hopeful side, looking for the possibilities. So, PageofCups, Tiburn and others with a similar viewpoint, please continue to post as you are voices of sanity and hope at this dreadful time.
Ollie - agreed.
Trek - agreed re all oilers, but the demands on the BG are immediate and if the enviro argument is allowed to gain traction then the BG’s own portfolio will never be rebalanced! It’s now or never in my view.
PageofCups - yes, all agreed. We think along the same lines. I expect and hope to see snippets of news re the other holdings during the next few weeks, then a decision re the JR at the end of March. Enough procrastination by the BG and major oilers: time for negotiation!
Trek you are absolutely correct that ‘green’ is now the worldwide trend. However, I would argue that that is precisely what makes it imperative for the Bahamians to grab this chance now and with absolutely no delays. Let’s face it, oil is still going to be required for many years to come, but with every passing year, the stance of the greenies creeps. If the Bahamians wish to remain poor forever then so be it, but if they - and indeed any major oilier looking at what we’ve got - want to grab this one opportunity before green takes over the world, it has to be now. For that reason it is not an option - as has been alluded to here before - for a major to wait until our licences expire. They gave to grab the chance now.