Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[scot126] 25/1/2022 14:27

There is no "78p cap". Fact.

Even the use of such a term, at time of writing and within the context of equity investors examining the merits of the PANR investment case, is an official-sounding but intellectually false label.

Henceforth, your made up "78p cap" shall be termed "johnswan193's dunce's cap". /end

[johnswan193] 25/1/2022 14:21

Scot - I never said it had anything to do with what the CB holder would do, but it would have an impact on the share price because of the uncertainty it brings for market participants. Which is exactly what has happened. Plus all the other issues I already flagged previously (incl. Farallon). I called it, it played out exactly as expected, and here you are saying I have a battered ego? You were the one saying there was no such cap. Bizarre.

[scot126] 25/1/2022 14:18

johnswan193 - go speak to your CB desk if your employer has such a desk. Then come back, admit you know b^gger all about CBs and agree to listen and learn because every single correction of your content is to establish the facts of the investment case and not written solely to deflate further your oft-battered ego. What a child.

InToTheWild - there is no "cap". You think you are knowledgeable when in reality you are a superficial trade type with the self-confidence of a village idiot. Google The Dunning-Kruger Effect". That's you.

Don't forget to let us all know when you have some value add content to post.

[johnswan193] 25/1/2022 14:04

Scot, the "78p effect" played out exactly as expected. It has not played out because people on this BB flagged it, it would have played out that way regardless. You say people should not pay attention, yet again what happened was called exactly right (and I even had the added bonus of a top up opportunity sub-70p).

Rabito, do you have any examples to point to where an O&G company has achieved 50% of their NPV10 for sale of an asset? I'm not suggesting there hasn't been but problem with NPV10 is that 10 might be too low for a buyer, using a higher rate changes the value materially, buyer outlay assumptions probably more conservative than management estimates, and finally and most importantly, once the buyer factors in the additional outlay of the acquisition into the model the NPV is hugely reduced.

Jonny is that 60% per zone or 60% something proves to be commercial? ;-) And what is success, a >80p share price after this years operations have been complete?

[chris0805] 25/1/2022 13:53

Here I am, brain the size of an NGMS27.... & you want me to believe all these 40 years oil industry veterans / experts know more an ngms27....

[winner66] 25/1/2022 13:52

Share price has been at 79p today . I maintain we will finish over 80p . So let’s see at close

[madd_rip] 25/1/2022 13:30

I think NGMS would only hear huge amounts of laughing on the other side of the line as he fails miserably trying to educate experts in the field who do this job day in day out. Time for filtering again methinks, he is so constantly negative, reminds me of Marvin the Paranoid Android in Hitch Hikers guide to the galaxy.

[winner66] 25/1/2022 13:18

Intothewild , really quite unbelievable. You know nothing say nothing and I think you actually believe yourself . There is no cap apart from the dunce one that you place on your head prior to posting .

[scot126] 25/1/2022 13:16

Ok then, InToTheWild, short it at 78p and shut up. If you're 100% right it's a no brainer of a trade for you.

BTW, yet to read any value-add content from you. Are you planning on doing so at any point or are we just to anticipate more fact-less, emotive trader drivel? Witness your post immediately above. No facts, no evidence, no explanation based on professional experience. Emotional hot air.....and off it floats. Meaningless gibberish. Stock is going up IMO based on the content of yesterday's webinar.

If anyone spots the webinar being posted for review on YouTube, please let us all know. TIA.

[chris0805] 25/1/2022 13:11

Post of the day Rabito79..... lol lol lol :-))))))))GLAC

[mojad5] 25/1/2022 13:10

Nice one Rabito (for us older ones who can remember Columbo)!

[rabito79] 25/1/2022 13:00

Ngms, I literally applied a 50% discount to the NPVs in my comment. Also please let me be clear, I understand the significance of flow tests. You and WillitFlow are not the only people in the world that understand the significance of flow tests. Likewise I understand that oil shares can trade well below NPV calculations, again you are not the only one that is aware of this.Pretty sure we have covered the nitrogen lift earlier. They had a column of water/frac fluids to displace did they not?Lastly do you think LKA never considered these points in their review of Alkaid. Perhaps you should e-mail them and point out your concerns. Perhaps these industry experts are like the rest of us and don't really have the full ngms understanding of flow testing. Make sure you mention your Hurricane experience.Have you contacted Roger Young and told him that he should have considered permeability before foregoing his $3M in fees. Hopefully he has heard of that term before, best be prepared to have to explain it to him. In fact this would make a an excellent Columbo episode. We can spend the majority of the program pointing the finger at federal legislation, waxing up TAPS and it being gas. Then at the last moment you can say, 'Just one more thing....permeability?'Camera pans to Roger Young, Bob Rosenthal, LKA crest fallen as they had not considered permeability whilst NGMS arrogantly puffs on his cigar.

[scot126] 25/1/2022 12:58

Right then, a wee spot of education for those with an open mind and sufficiently sentient to realise middle office maestro johnswan193 may be "at the pinnacle" of his profession but does not, repeat not, know everything about front office matters, ie. financial analysis, valuation methodologies, trading and hedging strategies, etc.

I'm pretty annoyed he and a few others have attempted (and succeeded?) to insert the idea that there's a 78p ceiling on the PANR share price until the data from Talitha #A/Theta West-1 arrives, implying Heights Capital must be fully delta hedged on its *total* convertible bond (CB) exposure. This is theoretical and intellectual bunkum and not the way the market operates.

Did everyone notice that Heights subscribed for $3m (up from $2m initially) in the equity component of the December '21 raise? Knowing legals, settlement and some sort of listing in Ireland or Guernsey or some such can take a wee while, a CB investor will often subscribe for a small tranche of equity to a) show willing and a public signal of support and b) so that they can use this small equity stake to delta hedge their first quarter's exposure.

We know the fixed repayments are made quarterly for 5 years, agreed? That's $2.75m per quarter? Unless the CB holder is content solely with clipping the interest rate over the period of the CB, then there is no mathematical or trading requirement to hedge out much more than one or two quarterly repayments. Thus, IMHO, it would not surprise me if Heights no longer owned the c.3.5m shares allotted to them from the equity portion of the fundraise.

Depending on their ability to borrow stock, I guess there's a possibility they may have hedged another quarter of exposure? Actually, Prolapse if you're reading this, can you look back through your Euroclear data for, say, September '21 and track/publish the monthly borrow on Euroclear since then if you're so minded?

Let's stipulate for the purposes of this post that Heights has delta hedged three quarters out? Call it $10m worth of stock or circa 10.5m shares? That volume has been mopped up easily by the market since the fundraise was announced in early December, hasn't it?

Meanwhile, this magic, spooky, scary figure of 78p appears to have entered the collective consciousness of many. It's an intellectual and practical nonsense and we all know the identity of the clown who propagated the fallacy to salve his collapsed ego, all on an anonymous bulletin board for goodness sake.

Here's the thing, folks. From what was heard last night in the webinar, you are equally as entitled to price the upside risk as you are the downside risk. If sufficient shareholders and investors value the upside risk such that 78p, 79p, 80p, 85p, etc. is an acceptable price at which to purchase shares or add to their position then the share price will move up. There is not, IMO, $50m worth of borrowed stock sitting there ready to be slotted into retail demand at 78p by Heights Capital. If this was the case, we'd be seeing evidence of same via the borrow on PANR. My research indicates the borrow on PANR is extremely difficult with little volume available.

If you've been spooked by this mythical 78p ceiling disseminated by some unethical or ill-educated posters then that's a shame. The good news is that last night's webinar will presumably be available to review at some point today. Have another look at the webinar, ignore this fake "truism" of the 78p ceiling which has taken root in the minds of too many and simply ask yourself, "Based on the factual evidence presented in the webinar, is PANR worth £585m [750m shares x £0.78] today? If you think it's undervalued at £585m you buy the shares. If you think its overvalued at £585m then you sell it.

PS FYI - Darcon has already posted some excellent content on the Guild today. I commend it as a forum. It's not a circle of happy clappy cultists. It's for serious research, analysis and commentary where proof and evidence are paramount and where, wait for it, posters actually request readers fact-check them or request readers pick holes in their posted logic. Brilliant. If you have any questions on how to join, swendab1 is your man.

[winner66] 25/1/2022 12:39

InToTheWild , haven’t you got anything better to do . If you have Level 2 you will see the order book , the list of market makers , the buys and sells , orders etc etc . I’ve no idea why you are posting rubbish. We will go over 80p this afternoon and then what will you write !

[mojad5] 25/1/2022 12:38

It's clear to me how confident management must be by not mitigating any risk by pursuing the farmout deal. Especially, as it appears from the webinar, that the farmin numbers were substantial.

[winner66] 25/1/2022 12:28

SirMark if there’s one person (other than myself who I’d like to see a life changing upturn financially it’s you. Your unwavering commitment as a shareholder is amazing . You like myself track level 2 activity , takes all of the guess work out . Here’s to an incredible 2022

[ngms27] 25/1/2022 12:27

InToTheWild, that's your opinion, one I do not share.