||COM SHS NPV
||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Oil & Gas Producers
|uknighted: And perhaps the ADVFN shareholders would like to know why, in the 6 months Chambers & Hodges have been working on Sefton, the ADVFN share price has halved!|
He's getting worse when it's obviously not true if anyone cares to check the share price!
Maybe Matt has slighted him in some way?|
|bcomms: I handle Sefton’s PR and am therefore an official spokesperson on behalf of the Company and its BOD. My role is to ensure transparent communications with Sefton’s shareholders so will be handling any shareholder queries, thereby freeing up time for Raylene and the rest of the Board to focus on delivering its strategy which includes completing the sale of the Kansas assets, seeking a satisfactory conclusion to the Ellerton Claim and progressing new ventures which will deliver long term value for Sefton’s shareholders.
In my capacity as PR to Sefton, I deliver the following response to the blog posted by California Joe on 14 July and I am clarifying a number of issues raised in the blog so as to avoid any confusion or speculation over the position of Raylene Whitford in relation to Satu/Utas/Sefton.
Raylene Whitford has NOT established a consultancy business nor has any intention of doing so. She DID cause a company to be incorporated and the incorporation of this company was transparently reported to the NOMAD. The company is dormant, has no assets or liabilities nor has had turnover or expenses and is in the process of being dissolved.
In relation to another claim by California Joe, I confirm that Raylene Whitford HAS NEVER and WOULD NEVER leaked price sensitive or commercially sensitive information, including a supposed expense claim.
The only reason I am posting this is because I realise that Sefton has a history of misinformation and speculation on Bulletin Boards and other shareholder forums which in turn lead to speculation and volatility in the share price. I would urge shareholders to appreciate that the company takes its commitments to corporate governance and shareholder engagement very seriously and any news which is deemed price sensitive by the company’s NOMAD will be delivered via the appropriate and official channels (ie RNS). I will not be making a habit out of responding to rumours and speculation however think it is important to clarify the above position and let shareholders know that if they would like to know the OFFICIAL company line on anything then they can contact me on firstname.lastname@example.org and I will do my best to respond in a timely fashion. My final comment (and this is really more of a personal comment) is that having been involved with Sefton for about a month, I have been most impressed with the professionalism, focus, pragmatism and work ethic of Raylene and the rest of the team as they work tirelessly for the benefit of all shareholders. They are 100% focussed on stabilising and growing the company.|
I remind people to do their own research and take into account such expert reports as the IEA produces. The latest report is very negative on oil prices going forward into 2016.
I agree doing research is very important. But alone it is not enough. One must also form one's own conclusions.
I would not take the IEA report as gospel anymore than I would listen to Chris Oil. In 2014 the IEA's medium term outlook report did not accurately predict the current oil price environment. If they were wrong then, perhaps their current report will also be proven in time to be inaccurate.
Anyway as far as SER is concerned the IEA report is irrelevant as SER has no producing assets, and as I keep saying it is purely a speculative punt based on 'what ifs'. Any rise in SER's share price that might occur will almost certainly come in advance of the 'what ifs' materialising or not. The vested interests will make it so if they can.
One thing is clear from recent price action that someone is supporting the price at current levels. Under normal circumstances one might have expected SER to fall to the value of their cash or even slightly lower.|
|cyan: I do recommend that investors carefully review the final results and note the going concern statement;
"There are uncertainties in the assumptions which could be material - the most significant being the release from the litigation and securing financing to close a new acquisition.
Material uncertainties for the next 12 months include:
-- Commodity price fluctuations: further instability in the oil price may affect the Company's access to funding, thereby limiting it's ability to do business in the sector
-- Liquidity: the Company's financial resources are limited, therefore a lack of access to sufficient capital could result in the delay or curtailment of operations "
My take on that is SER is at risk of going bust.
Looking at the market value ,imo,a reasoned conclusion is that the share price should be at least half the present value.
The critical point to moving this effective cash shell forward is attracting new capital. Hopefully SER can, but at what cost? A lot more paper.
SER are not going to add value assets for free.|
Interesting re the tweets from Levi.
Yes I think you are right regarding another "speculative episode". Of course there will have to be something new and compelling to be speculated about, that can get the greed and fear (and hence share price) racing again.
As I have said before, stock operators throughout history have been trying to convince the market they are taking one action when in fact they are doing the opposite. The sad reality is not that they do this (I doubt it will ever change), but that substantial numbers of investors keep falling for it.
So many investors see a doubling or tripling of the share price on the basis of pure speculation from these commentators and it is their greed for more that keeps them in their position when in fact they should be exiting, or their fear of missing out makes them chase an inflated share price and enter a new position near the top of the move. Of course if it were not this way, then speculative moves could not occur.|
|2wakeywakey: Personally I do not think the return of Dan Levi would be beneficial, but as I understand it he does have the shares to force an EGM. He could propose a resolution appointing himself a director at that EGM. But shareholders still have to vote him in.
Levi and Chris Oil have their own agenda which is not necessarily aligned with the company or shareholders best interests, regardless of what he may write about on his blog or tweet about.
CJ has been ranting on his blog that Raylene et al have been doing a poor job since Daniel Levi resigned.
But when you read between the lines it really boils down to the fact that CJ had convinced himself (and others via his blog) that share price would be 1p in a matter of a few weeks on the basis of some speculation and a rise in the share price based on nothing of substance, and now the share price has fallen back (to a level that still over-generously values the company based on its cash balance) he has changed his tune.
Anyone viewing that share price rise with just a little objectivity could have easily tripled their money, and be looking to re-enter a new position at prices close to the recent placing.
One assumes that the share price will take off again at some point to allow Levi and Oil to exit their large position, but I wouldn't bet the ranch on it. Just a small portion of the profits from the last spike in my case.
There is the slim possibility that the company actually pulls off an asset acquisition on favourable terms, appoints a new board of directors and builds a new and profitable business. But with all the shady characters circling the Sefton 'corpse' like vultures, I would say their work is cut out for them and it will be a very hard slog.|
|cyan: No doubt more lies will be disseminated.
Here is the law explained
"Tip 8 – Consider whether posts are being used to try to manipulate the company’s share price Not all posters are motivated simply by expressing their views.
There is a category of posters on bulletin boards whose real aim is to artificially deflate and inflate the price of shares in order to make a profit. The real purpose of critical posts may therefore be to depress the share price so that they can acquire shares more cheaply. Conversely, “rumours” of a takeover may lead to a substantial short-term increase in the share price.
It is a civil and criminal offence under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and Financial Services Act 2012 to deliberately make misleading statements/disseminate false information about shares with a view to affecting the share price.
If you suspect this is a poster’s real motivation, you should immediately report them to the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”).
Courtesy of ;
|fenseal3: The fact they got shares which is what peeps are saying says one thing....you would not take shares in a company if you thought it may go bust....also they would never take shares if they new JE was still going to be involved....my guess SER share price will have a big day soon and the two will be able to hold or sell, also peeps saying that JE will be involved in this restructure are way off the mark, JE was a headache that has gone, why bring that pain back, for me this has all the hall marks of a recovery, will keep watching!!|
|j8grc: LSE does. Click on SER share price tab..|
Sefton Resources share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange