Advance Energy Share Discussion Threads

[officerdigby] 12/2/2022 09:57

Yes mistake here was no mid-drill escape pod placement was done.

[sos100] 11/2/2022 12:08

I didn't see anything in that interview thats signals for short/med term recovery.
Praise for managment that couldn't even do a backup placing 😂

May cause some speculative bounce(year end)but not really a longer term investment..

[amaretto1] 10/2/2022 21:26

That's exactly what's happened here .. nearly word for word ...Oil share ramp brigade all over Advfn

[shareinvestment1] 10/2/2022 13:44

In this game you have to stay rational. I hold a very large position and, although I can't forget about Buffalo, I look at ADV now in a similar fashion to when I first bought, after this board came in. Basically a cash shell where this time around the focus is on closing a production deal mostly funded by debt and to less extend an equity raise. There is no guarantee that they will be successful, but they raised a massive amount just in equity for Buffalo when they had a similar market cap. I'm convinced that if they close a production deal primarily debt funded, they will have no issue in also doing a part as an equity raise. Time will tell but I still see a large upside potential. DYOR.

[tomboyb] 10/2/2022 11:21

Thanks for that -

Had a punt on this a few weeks back -

Seems like a nice guy, but looks like a long wait for an acquisition -

Build on less risky investments -

[shareinvestment1] 10/2/2022 11:04

sweet listen to today's interview on pro active investors

[tazerface] 09/2/2022 19:21

Another red day for this rabid dog

[sweet karolina2] 09/2/2022 17:41

si1,

Spot on I was tempted to do exactly that, but could I look myself in the mirror having profited from others shattered hopes and dreams? I decided I could not so I just waited to see which way the coin toss would come up this time. I could have gone either way and had it not been the disaster it was may have hit 10p until the realisation dawned that even if everything did then proceed without a hitch it would not make ADV, who were on the hook to provide all the development funding, worth £100m.

The market does insane things in quite a repeatable fashion and it is possible to profit from that insanity, but that is nearer to theft than investing.

PS

What did you think the real COS was?

[shareinvestment1] 09/2/2022 16:10

Clearly all us invested have lost a massive amount. Unfortunately investing, like life, has these dramatic moments. I have been investing for many years and after a similar duster 10 years ago with Tangiers Petroleum drilling offshore Morocco with Galp, I learned to a) invest in companies with much higher CoS and b) take profits off the table. On the back of that lesson, I selected ADV and took profits out, almost in the end similar to the capital invested. I still hold all remaining shares hoping for a mainly debt funded production deal, which is possible, and have unfortunately learned another lesson ie especially in cases where there is only one asset take all or most money out before drill results.

[sweet karolina2] 08/2/2022 19:44

A few bits from the CPR that you should have read:



"Carnarvon Petroleum reprocessed the 3D seismic utilising Full Waveform Inversion (‘FWI’) and remapped the field. Improved seismic imaging as a result of the FWI shows that the crest of the field is located further east than previously mapped and identified the opportunity to re-develop the field.

Following the mapping of the field on the newly reprocessed seismic data, Carnarvon Petroleum undertook geological static modelling and simulation studies to determine if redevelopment of the field was possible. This work showed that IF the interpretation of an un-drilled attic was correct, a redevelopment of the field was POSSIBLE."

"The Buffalo field was brought on stream on 29 December 1999. Initial clean oil rates of 50,000 bopd were achieved in January 2000. Water production began in mid-February 2000, earlier than expected. In December 2000, Nexen assumed Operatorship and 100% equity in the field. Buffalo 6 [the well which would have been to the west of B10 and might therefore have hit the target], which was planned by BHP to target the currently mapped crest of the field, was not drilled." Ie BHP who drilled and P&Aed a number of wells before bringing some into production flogged the field on PDQ and the new owners did not fancy looking in the attic even though there was commercial albeit very watery oil in the dining room and 2nd bedroom.

"Carnarvon Petroleum has utilised the PSDM depth data for interpretation, which is quite common in the industry. In RISC’s opinion it would be preferable to interpret the data in two-way-time (‘TWT’) rather than depth domain. Interpreting in TWT allows for the interpreter to utilise synthetic seismograms to accurately tie the well formation tops to the seismic and is independent of any residual corrections applied to the velocity model or the depth domain data to tie the wells. However, BHP did note some issues tying synthetics." Could this be part of the reason they missed the target? - "The post-well evaluation indicates that the well was drilled into the hanging wall of a fault, although uncertainty in seismic resolution also contributed to the reservoir being significantly deeper than expected at this location."

"Development is economic with current 1C, 2C and 3C resources. Development is expected to proceed after appraisal provided the appraisal outcome is not worse than 1C (~95%), acceptable commercial arrangements can be secured with facility (FPSO, MOPU, FSO) owners (95%) and the joint venture partners can secure development funding (95%). RISC estimate the probability of development to be 86% (95%x95%x95%)."

So what about all the other things that can and do go wrong? eg missing the target! or any other errors in the other assumptions and models used to guess at what might be discovered in this new UNPROVEN part of the field?

[sweet karolina2] 08/2/2022 17:35

The lesson is to read the detail for yourself. By all means ask questions of knowledgeable people and don't just accept answers that are not backed up by provable facts.

The attic is a different part of a proven field but there is no proof there is anything in the attic - highly likely there is, but not certain. The oil being there is only part of the story, if porosity is not good enough you can't get it out. If the water cut is too high most of what you recover is water. There is a reason why nobody else, including the operator, wanted to fund this well. There is a reason why, having missed the target, neither party wants to have another shot for another $20m. I don't know what those reasons are but I can guess.

There is a lot to the oil game it is not drill, pump then sell. If you want to play with AIM micro cap oilers then you really do need to learn it for yourself or you will be sucked in by rampers.

[amaretto1] 08/2/2022 16:57

Let's just say... i wouldn't have risked the same amount...Stupidly i thought they were drilling in to a proven field ...But going thru the attic ... but would have still hit oil They said on more than one occasion it was shut off for commercial reasons .. the price of oil at the time.But said when shut off it was pumping 4000 bpd .... could kick myself for being taken in !!! Costly

[amaretto1] 08/2/2022 16:52

So do you think the knowledgeable ramp squad who vacate the other oil threads knew this ? They certainly stand out ...So I'm pretty sure you know who I mean

[sweet karolina2] 08/2/2022 13:52

The real problem here is investors who did not DYOR to properly appreciate the risks. The CPR said 86% chance of commercial - The BoD did not lie, that is what it said. The fact that no UNPROVEN 2C resource ever has that high a chance of becoming commercial was not questioned by anyone who invested on the back of it. Indeed had the CPR been much more realistic would anyone have invested? There are lots of UNPROVEN 2C resources which will never become anything else as nobody will fund the drilling to find out.

I was very surprised anyone funded this one at the price paid on readmission, but so called Sophisticated Investors did. Paying £20m for 80% (the other 20% was existing shareholders) of a 50% stake costing $20m in a drill nobody else was prepared to fund seemed ludicrous to me and no doubt on reflection seems ludicrous to those who did it at the time.

But what if it had worked? $20m on black for one spin of the wheel and it came up black? The BoD would be super heroes and nobody would hear a word against them ever again.

However when the appraisal results came in there are lots of things which could have led to a P&A - eg water cut is an issue in the region. Also very rarely do all 2C resources become 2P reserves and when a proper discounted cash flow is possible then NPVs often disappoint because people over estimate how quickly the oil will come out and be sold and underestimate the costs, both OPEX, CAPEX and maintenance CAPEX. All these things happen all the time to entirely competent BoDs. The big problem is being a BoD of a one shot wonder the consequence of it going wrong is catastrophic, but if it works then the rewards are much bigger than they are in a company with numerous projects some of which become commercial and others that become write offs.

So the real problem here again are the PIs who bought in not having thought about the failure scenario. Had the BoD done more to warn of the real risks over and above the copper plate forward looking statements bit that applies to everything, would anyone have invested? Certainly, I hope, that nobody would have put in more than they could afford to lose - some posts talk of 6 figure losses, I wish I could afford to blow 6 figures on one spin of the roulette wheel and laugh it off when I lose.

So those of you who want someone to blame and if possible see them face justice for your losses, look in the mirror. You made the investing decision and you only have yourselves to blame for the losses and congratulate for the rewards. The key thing is to learn the real lessons from both of those so you make better investing decisions and have more smaller rewards and fewer and smaller losses. Definitely don't do a Nick Leeson and double down to try to win it all back.

This company has been un-investable ever since Dave Whitby first broke AIM rules back when it was still CEB resources. He raised a load of money to drill a well in Indonesia then squandered the cash on fees and related party transactions and then went on for several years with placing after placing pretending glory was still just round the corner and lots of people believed him. Gorringe was a bit more honest but was grasping at straws investing in no hope projects (Badger - never had any chance of drilling and lost the licence, Coulter drilled and missed the target but was always going to be a problem to bring into production, Bunga Mas (Bungled Mess) - did the work overs on producing assets but they were already so depleted they never produced enough to make it worth the cost). At least this lot did actually drill the hole they raised the money to drill. But they have had their shot and the best they can realistically offer is to do what Gorringe did, but you can't rule out them doing a Whitby.

Yes there are a lot of dubious AIM companies, but you don't need to look much further than the history of this one to realise what investing here would mean letting yourselves in for.

[sweet karolina2] 08/2/2022 13:52

Double post

[ny boy] 08/2/2022 12:42

There are hundreds of dubious AIM companies, along with some board members who are unfit for purpose.Investor beware trying to think a stock is cheap because it has tanked always dyor

This one is simply un-investable imo

[amaretto1] 08/2/2022 12:36

End of the days these so called experts in oil and gas ... gambled 20 million of share holders cash on a drill ... that was far from safe !!Les needs to be put in court ... he was very very economical with the true picture.....His reputation is shot ... I'd like to no how he feels sat in his Geneva gaff ..If In anyway i can get him in court ... i will do ... it's not over !!!