Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[inteligentia8] 17/12/2021 07:12

hxxps://www.share-talk.co.uk/announcements/rns/pantheon-resources/operations-update/202112170700079652V

[inteligentia8] 17/12/2021 06:06

Goldman Says $100 Oil Possible as Record Demand Outpaces Supply

[chris0805] 17/12/2021 05:50

#20573 - fantastic post Rabito79.A well worded response which explains plenty to long term and newer followers of the PANR investment case... :-)

[scot126] 16/12/2021 22:50

Is that physics or financial modelling you're advising john "The Pinnacle" swan193 about, Rabito79?!

Bravo. The perfect post. h/t

[rabito79] 16/12/2021 22:46

If you can confidently assess the COS of the reservoirs I am sure you will be able to work it out. Start at the bottom and work your way up ?

[johnswan193] 16/12/2021 22:09

Thank you. Would you happen to have any links to the released Otto data and mapping of that to the Pantheon named targets?

[rabito79] 16/12/2021 22:08

The Otto numbers are the Pantheon reservoirs just under different names and previous to the last 5 years appraisal derisking.Pantheon's numbers when reviewed by LKA largely stood up to scrutiny. I don't see how this would change going forward.

[johnswan193] 16/12/2021 21:37

Rabito,

Those numbers have nothing to do with me.

“I can tell you that management are terrible salesman”. I guess that explains the appraisal/exploration inconsistency.

The para about Otto, I can’t tell from that at all how that compares to Panr. What is the general practice around COS numbers? It has to be extremely subjective, right? And what about recoverables? I get that the TW numbers are supposedly conservative, but what about all the other numbers, how reliable do these tend to be?

Point noted about the broker valuation, I’ll have a look back at that.

Like you suggested earlier, each target will have its own merits that are depending on various factors - they can’t all have the same COS applied. Ultimately we’ll just have to agree to disagree but I absolutely hope you are proved to be right.

[rabito79] 16/12/2021 21:06

Johnswan, as a salesman who works in the oil industry I can tell you that management are terrible salesman, so I don’t really buy the full sales mode piece. Likewise if last years drill was part appraisal, part exploration it’s no surprise that Bob has referred to it as both at different times. The webinars were recorded live after all.


As much as 6 years ago, Otto released numbers showing COS figures which ‘did not include reservoir effectiveness which can be overcome by horizontal drilling and fracture stimulation’. These numbers ranged from 10% to 40% for the individual reservoirs. Since then we have had the flow test at Alkaid, the eSeis work, Talitha A data including the VAS work and the award of production units. Yet using your numbers it would suggest there has been little or no derisking of the play at all. Indeed some have gone backwords. Like the Rehaboam Research article you shared you appear to completely ignore these 3rd party data points, although they did mention Otto right enough.





Please note my risked valuation is within about 20p or so of the Brokers risked valuation a point you seem to be ignoring. Likewise I have not actually stated a fully unrisked price target like Canaccord. My drilling upside target is not the same thing as Canaccord’s unrisked number hence why it’s ~50% lower and the reason for the much smaller gap between my risked and ‘drilling upside’ number. Hence why I repeat you are not comparing apples with apples. I am essentially saying there is a 60-70% chance Theta West will achieve 50% of its fully appraised value or circa 30-35% of the unrisked value, almost identical to Canaccord!!!!!


As for ngms, as others have suggested his contrarian views don’t necessarily correlate to his investing stance. I have calculated his risk reward for the LBFF coming good which is his very best outcome assuming the 60-70% is indeed for success in one zone.


Ngms Target NPV - $1/bbl
Biggest potential target - 1200 MMBO
COS for one zone - 60-70%
Risked valuation of biggest zone - $720M-$840M
Unrisked valuation - $1200M
Current Market Cap - $780M


As shown not great risk reward yet he remains invested. I do feel that you and ngms are sometimes blinded by your desire to be contrarian as the above numbers show.

[brian boru] 16/12/2021 20:54

Thanks for chart prediction, when this share moves it sure does move fast- in both directions!

[forwood] 16/12/2021 20:37

Pretty much as it was yesterday. With MACD crossing up over the signal line, the daily has now definitely moved to the positive. Although stochastics are pressing against the upper boundary, this indicator can stay elevated for a while, as can be seen with previous moves up. Both MACD and RSI have plenty of scope to move higher, particularly MACD which is very oversold. We could easily see the same degree of movement as today without pressuring the chart. Over the next few sessions I can see it exceeding the previous high by a comfortable margin.




A slight note of caution is the hourly, which is even more pressed than it was yesterday. It's come to rest on resistance around 78.20 but the elevated indicators didn't stop it moving up today. After a little consolidation, I don't see why that shouldn't continue, given the set up on the daily chart. Momentum should take us through resistance without too much difficulty, and after 81.5p, it's relatively plain sailing. Buy the dips has to be the tactic, which may occur at the resistance points which can be seen by drawing horizontal lines on the chart and seeing the pinch points (81.5 and 86.5 being the those visible on the daily).

[johnswan193] 16/12/2021 19:01

Forwood, chart prediction from here please? Closing at 78.2p seemed like a very positive statement.

[forwood] 16/12/2021 18:42

Interesting article arguing about the helpful impact of inflation on oil prices

[johnswan193] 16/12/2021 18:42

Rabito,

In reply to the earlier post:

- Mgmt. were in sales pitch mode in Oct-20 ahead of farm out / placing. As part of this went to effort to point out Talitha A was appraisal, not exploration, and this was in reference to >1bn barrels recoverable. As already mentioned on this BB, what is appraisal/exploration is a grey area, particularly given it could be argued Talitha A was part appraisal part exploration. I will accept what they said as pretty harmless sales spin, not lying, not being deliberately misleading.

- Mgmt. were in sales pitch mode in Aug-21 ahead of farm out / placing. This time they told us Talitha A was exploration and now we are onto appraisal. Yes it conflicts with what they said previously. Personally I didn’t like that as consistency is important to me as an investor and management should expect investors will remember what they said 10 months prior, but again I can accept it as pretty harmless sales spin.

- Same Aug-21 webinar Bob was asked about chance of project commercial/development success. He estimated 60-70%. He did not specify whether this was with regards to Talitha, TW, Alkaid or a combination. My interpretation of this was that it related to the project as a whole. My view is that it was a throwaway remark where <60% would suggest still a lot of doubt despite all the great evidence we’re seeing, while >70% would suggest overconfidence in the absence of any flow test.

- I may not be recalling this correctly, but was Mike Smith asked something about expected success based on what he was seeing here compared to what he saw in the past, but he didn’t really answer the question or didn’t provide a strong indication either way? Appreciate if somebody could confirm whether this happened or not.

- My 11-14% COS was not *my* estimated COS. This was merely a reverse engineered COS using Scot’s assumption of 8 separate horizons where any one succeeding would result in commercial success. The point in doing this was that even if somebody was to take the 60-70% from Bob at face value as a reliable best estimate, a wide range of risked valuations applies, depending on the interpretation of whether he was referencing the entire project or individual horizons. (Note if using 5 targets, the individual COS only needs to be 20% to result in a 67% probability of at least one succeeding).

- I am not at all well placed to comment on your reference to 50% of flow tests being broadly successful, nor would I have the required experience to analyse each target using whatever existing and comparable data is available to come up with my own view of COS. (Any input from others on this - how to come up with a COS and what the variables typically are would be much appreciated). That doesn’t however prevent me from being able to make my own assessment of stated assumptions used in a model.

- There was a mention that something with less than a 20% COS would not be drilled. I haven’t heard that before and agree Jonny’s points about cost, reward and COS being connected. i.e. if cost relative to potential reward is a lower % than the estimated COS, then I don’t see why such a target would not be drilled (assuming no opportunity cost). Additionally, multiple low COS targets within a single drill may result in a high overall COS.

On that basis my suggestion that 60-70% COS per target was likely not realistic was due to:

1. Over-reliance on a throwaway remark made during a period when management are in sales pitch mode.

2. Most optimistic interpretation of the remark, resulting in a probability of commercial success (assuming only one needs to succeed) of 98.98%-99.76% for 5 targets, or 99.93%-99.99% for 8 targets. If this is what Bob meant, then I think he would have answered the question differently.

3. Other models, such as the Canaccord model which showed risked valuation being 32% of unrisked, not 60-70%.

4. The enormous disconnect between the market cap and the risked valuation resulting from the model using 60-70% COS i.e. the risked valuation from the model was near 10x the market cap.

[kiplig] 16/12/2021 16:38

Or, "Fank you"

[sirmark] 16/12/2021 15:42

Only one MM left below 80p

78.5 30,000 ARDA 09:13
80 30,000 PEEL 14:54
80 30,000 WINS 15:26
81.3 30,000 CFEP 15:35
81.3 30,000 MREX 15:34
81.4 30,000 SCAP 15:33
81.4 30,000 SING 15:33
81.4 30,000 CANA 15:34
81.6 30,000 STFL 15:30

[scot126] 16/12/2021 14:27

"what an opportunity they [Farallon] have given everybody"

*If* the 21/22 winter season proves successful, sirmark's statement will forever sum up 2021 perfectly for the long term holders of PANR. I suggest you bookmark that statement, sirmark, and revisit it after the upcoming Alaskan operations.

The F in Farallon stood for "fear" in the eyes of many throughout 2021. For others it stood for "fortuitous", "field day", "freedom". Let's see what happens.

PS Just an observation....trading volume appears to be tightening up nicely after the fundraise. *Feels* like the raise has been digested by the market fairly comfortably. If the reducing liquidity continues, those who wish to get set in order to play the newsflow trade of the next few months are going to have to pay a higher entry price, IMO.

[chris0805] 16/12/2021 14:14

Not sure that any poster, past or present worries on your behalf..

[ngms27] 16/12/2021 13:45

Rabito79, don't worry I have reviewed my risk / reward.

[unlikely2] 16/12/2021 13:12

First up for flow testing (starting in around one month's time) will be the LBFF at Talitha. What would folks regard as a successful flow rate? I seem to recall one of the BoD commenting that any flow at this location would be good, given how far down-dip it is from the crest.

[sirmark] 16/12/2021 12:40

That was my highest price paid 0.94p in my recent top up, so likewise looking forward to busting through that as well and with the cash in hand and the seller losing 5% of available shares to sell looks good and with only 9% left wont be long till they're no longer an issue. (what an opportunity they have given everybody)

[rabito79] 16/12/2021 12:37

You probably want to review your risk reward then ngms if that's your genuine opinion.

[ngms27] 16/12/2021 12:25

Yes I think it's a 60 to 70% COS of getting something commercial, NOT per zone. Lets hope the LBFF comes in ;)

However on reflection it was a throw away remark without any context. Lets see what the testing brings out and where that lies within our own interpretations of what was meant.

BTW I think we will test the 94p recent high Pre Talitha testing.