Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[arcadian] 26/4/2024 20:04

This morning I wrote a very positive post based on the resources and the gas bonus,
tempered by the uncertainties of funding. However I decided to scrub it as I thought I was going over the top.

As it turns out my sentiments have been echoed by others today and reinforced my feeling that this share could multiply several times before being bought out by a major. What we don`t know right now is how much of the assets will be surrendered to provide funds for the development but given time the company could still be worth several billion and perhaps benefit my family more than me.

[fordtin] 26/4/2024 19:25

@mcmather (#38066)

if you can find time to play the recordings, there are some very interesting presentation slides in the HB50 Senate hearings;



HB50 "An Act relating to carbon storage on state land; relating to the powers and duties of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission; relating to carbon storage exploration licenses; relating to carbon storage leases; relating to carbon storage operator permits; relating to enhanced oil or gas recovery; relating to long-term monitoring and maintenance of storage facilities; relating to carbon oxide sequestration tax credits; relating to the duties of the Department of Natural Resources; relating to carbon dioxide pipelines; and providing for an effective date."

If AGDC can tie this in with Pantheon's gas, HB222 to assist funding pipeline construction, Nutrien reopening their plant to convert natural gas to Ammonia and CO2 .....

The ducks seem to be getting in position.

[seedoftongo] 26/4/2024 18:01

Mark , don’t give them what they want .
They win every time you do that .

[mlf51] 26/4/2024 17:23

Come on pro " it's going to 10p" is not desperate and foolish? Be honest

[swendab1] 26/4/2024 17:16

Top man - and Ive just got into Discord ! Cheers

[jessieduke2] 26/4/2024 17:15

Sure Swendab1

[mcmather] 26/4/2024 17:03

All getting very interesting fordtin (#38064).

[swendab1] 26/4/2024 16:49

Jesse - copy that to the guild if you would please as some "Guilders" dont read other threads - best post I ve read in ages !!

[fordtin] 26/4/2024 16:43

mcmather - re "What I do think is realistic, is the state could make an investment in their future."

that's where HB222 comes in;



"The slide presentation in the first hearing explains the rationale for an investment of $1.2bn by Alaska’s Permanent Fund, to buy a 25% equity stake in the Alaska natural gas pipeline. Coupled with up to 70% debt financing and the Federal Loan Guarantee, it should help secure the remaining 75% equity funding, with an end result of securing cheap gas and future dividends for all Alaskans.

HB222 presented to House Resources Committee.
From 1:03:21pm to 1:53:51pm 02 Feb 2024.


House Bill 222 passed 5 to 1 and moved on to the Finance Committee.
From 2:17:10pm to 2:31:03pm 01 March 2024


At the time HB222 was passed on to the Finance Committee, Pantheon’s involvement wasn’t considered. I would expect the presentation to the Finance Committee to reflect the reduction in costs due to Pantheon’s location and low CO2."

[helpfull] 26/4/2024 16:32

Cor blimey, guv!

Mike290.

THIEF!

Be careful.

[mlf51] 26/4/2024 16:32

That's all she has

[nigoil] 26/4/2024 16:32

I'm glad I'm not in this dog over the weekend!

Strong Sell

Simples!........;-)

[mike290] 26/4/2024 16:26

Helpfull,

What are you talking about?

You sound desperate and foolish :-)

[mcmather] 26/4/2024 16:17

Re the pipeline, not yet had chance to watch the full video / debate (from yesterday), but interesting conclusion comment from John Sims, president of Enstar Natural Gas, from 38:54:

“yeah I mean, I'm a firm believer that the state needs to do what it can to be energy independent, And so if the state of Alaska wanted to make an investment in a pipeline, I would think that would be strategically a valuable long-term move. Because, again, you're talking about a 100 years worth of gas that, you know, think of a governmental body that owns the energy resource and can then dictate and determine how much to charge people coming in. They could give a large industrial customer a significant discount because they own the pipeline right. So if the Market's not going to support, the local Market's not going to support a massive pipeline project. it's just too expensive, as he said, and so that's not realistic. What I do think is realistic, is the state could make an investment in their future."

www.reddit.com/r/anchorage/comments/1ccnpqi/john_sims_president_of_enstar_natural_gas_and/

[turkey3] 26/4/2024 16:04

Don't forget to fill your boots.One day youll wake up and never see this cheap price again. ;-)

[helpfull] 26/4/2024 15:54

Cor blimey, guv!

Mike290.

THIEF!

Be careful.

[seedoftongo] 26/4/2024 15:04

Lizard 🦎 the outcast highly emotional investor of the gang .

“ please Pooh bear , please tell them NOW !! Tell them I gave you coins “
😂😂😂😂8514;😂

Still makes me laugh thinking back to that moment when he made that awful cringeworthy post ….

[sirmark] 26/4/2024 14:51

Great Post Jessie

[markliddiard] 26/4/2024 14:45

Mike290,As you say Hopeless is deceitful, but moreso uses psychological 'projection' tactics, I.e. tries to make the other person appear like they really are! Hence, when you reread her last post, what this really translates to is:'SHE IS MENTALLY BROKEN.SHE IS FINANCIALLY BROKEN.SHE IS MORALLY BROKEN'GLA LTH'ers!!

[mike290] 26/4/2024 14:38

Newcomers to this thread,


How would Helpfull know what I did?
He doesn't.

Contrary to Helpfull's deceitful statement, I was top-slicing my Pantheon shares at around 140p (to remove all of my costs) - not buying more shares.

I did buy back many more shares later on though (at about 40p then 30p and then down to just over 10p).
As always, probably more by luck than judgement.

Hence my huge profits.

Good luck with your investment in Pantheon.

[jessieduke2] 26/4/2024 14:28

References, your post: 38051
Do check out the server for more information but an overview reply on where we are:

PANR’s gas is pipline quality <3% co2 and is ready for wholesale without co2 stripping. It is this that puts PANR gas ahead of all other Nslope producers and puts PANR and the State (AGDC) in a symbiotic relationship. It’s not about geography.
This is huge commercial advantage over other Nslope producers who in order to qualify for pipeline access have a capital spend in the order of ~10b$ to build a carbon stripping plant.
Furthermore PANR’s low co2 gas allows PANR to leverage a cheap gas offering with minimal treatment requirements to the state that actually turns the probability of the pipeline project on its head, with enough margin to get the project funded and built. I have previously posted an economic example (copied below).

Strategically this puts PANR ahead of other n/slope producers as the State NEED PANR gas at no more than $1 per mmbtu to get this done. PANR and the State are bound at the hip which elevates PANR, a small AIM listed company to the top table, along side major O&G upstream but also top tier construction, international entities, Asian traders who deal in world LNG supply and distribution.

When the ripples of this hit the radar across industry, key stakeholders will want exposure to the upside of the project. Huge potential for a PANR re rate.

So, to your question References it’s not a case of ‘do PANR get to use the pipe first’?, PANR ARE THE PIPE - and allow the economics to work. I know that sounds ridiculous, - to be the reason a global 40b$ lng project could ultimately go ahead, but it’s a fact. What does that do to a minnow like PANR? Shock and awe stuff, shock and awe.

To answer your other questions. The AlaskaLNG project is fully permitted as a whole. It awaits its FID for phase1 after the completion of FEED work scheduled to run for 1yr from July 2024.
My understand is that the AGDC need an investment of 50 m$ for FEED, but investment partners locking at that require a firm commitment of offtake for the gas (Enstar and Nutrien) and a producer to commit to long term supply contract with a price attached. We know PANR have given this assurance. The timeline for both the AGDC FID decision and PANR full funding strategy is in sink and one could argue the AGDC schedule is actually pegged to PANR development schedule.

With those commitments in hand the AGDC can work on phase 2 stakeholders. (AGDC announced this week the update with the Japanese consul to Alaska) and there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence of industry specialists liking pantheon articles, obviously aware of the projects development. My hunch is heads of agreements for key project stakeholders are being put in place ahead of FEED decision with option agreements for phase 2.

Other developments from the Alaska legislature is House Bill 222 (HB222) which looks to allow the Alaskan Permanent Fund to invest for upto 25% of project funding. The State is gearing up for skin in the game, which is prudent as the below economic model shows huge IRR’s for the State, and they can out to bed the instate squabble over PFD cuts which are the yearly payments made to every Alaskan as a share of the states natural resources income, yr on yr income and payments for the state budgets are falling.

The destiny of State economic growth is in its own hands, and a no brainer (IMO) for the State to back its own infrastructure project.

And so the age of the symbiotic relationship between PANR and State begins …..


Pipeline economics:

The AGDC point to the presentation slides for basic economic considerations.

Using guided input cost and sale price, along with financing headroom shows a robust project.

hxxps://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_documents.asp?session=33&;docid=29743

Global LNG Japan current price $8.993

Enstar has stated importedLNG as cook-inlet replacement could be $16 double the baseline cost of AlaskaLNG phase1.

From AGDC website:
Pipline capacity 3.3 bcfd
Long time planning 3.1 bcfd

Pipeline development economics look sound:
(All figures are illustrations)

8$ mmcf delivered price gas out
1$ mmcf gas in (PANR)

Gives 7$ per mmcf to build and finance pipeline.

7$x1m =7m$ per bcf x 180bcf (PANR agreed supply with AGDC)
Revenue on 180bcf per year is 1.26b$

10.7b$ project build out cost but let’s say 12b$ for headroom.

Funded @6% amortised over 20yrs & 30yrs
Gives 700-900m$ per year financing payment.

Ramp up to clear 300m$ profit from base line Instate supply of 180bcf
(1.26b$ rev less 900m$ financing payment)

Senior debt - Federal guarantee loans 60%
Junior debt - mostly likely 20yr, 10yr bond
Mezzanine debt - investment bank/balance sheet.


Phase2 export:
Additional compression stations on pipeline say x4 to push volume.
Max capacity to 3.3 bcf per day.
1277 bcf per year.
Long term planning based at 3.1 bcfd

Profit ramps on forward curve as debt is covered from baseline phase1
Additional profit as loans get paid down.

Obviously this there are tax implications to deduct but it’s hard to argue with the general concept of this calculation.



Join us @
Flights Investment Server
Has an AlaskaLNG channel dedicated to following this element of the PANR investment case.

Download the discord app for phone or laptop then use this Invite to the server:

hxxps://discord.gg/fdagvxFDun