Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[zeusfurla] 16/5/2022 19:31

Excellent presentation from the BoD.

The key issue for me is what is the range of probable outcomes based on the limited (but growing) datasets that PANR has. I also added a few more today before close as I am more than comfortable that whatever the actual recoverable oil figure turns out to be the range is above the value the market is putting on the company.

I want to congratulate management for going out of their way to give investors the type of information that usually would be reserved for prospective buyers. Well done and keep up the stellar work. I would compare positively the conservative approach taken here to some other companies I know with less scruples.

SFS resource estimate to come I suspect before Alkaid spud. I am expecting a similar gradual share price appreciation up to Alkaid results, subject to the avoidance of wider market turbulence.

[officerdigby] 16/5/2022 19:05

Scot I hate to break it to you.. listened to the webinar at 1.5 speed! And jumped intros.
..

It was the next most logical question, I thought.

We only know the inhomogeneity in a few locations vertically is what I thought..
If in these fields permeability is just determined by burial depth and seismic will tell all on saturation OK I accepted that.

I will have to pore over the last webinar again
Did they do radial homogeneity?

Think homogeneity covers my mean rather than heterogenous.- because in my world heterogenous means type changes solid-liquid-gas. But hey tom8to tomato!

Actually.. I meant relative homogeneity!

[johnswan193] 16/5/2022 19:03

Good post Fordtin.

"It's clear that you were extremely confident at your previous career".

I like that you used the word confident and not competent.

Apart from that, I was impressed by the presentation, despite having recently reduced my position to 40% (from 60%) of what it was previously.

[scot126] 16/5/2022 18:58

Perhaps, yoghurt73, perhaps.

The reason I doubt it is that Spangle93 began his post with "Some good catches there Officer Digby". That's a total sop in response to a leading and snide remark from OfficerDigby which revealed OD's a) willingness to cynically criticise the content of a presentation *before* doing the honourable thing by actually listening to the bloody presentation b) willingness to infer management was pulling a fast one on us shareholders by skating over the heterogeneity of the reservoirs.

Plus, and in all fairness consistently, Spangle93 disapproves of my, ahem, somewhat robust style in rebutting posts which I deem to be mischievous/nefarious. I accept that criticism but I'm not going to change.

[fordtin] 16/5/2022 18:50

Evening scot, (post #26338)

I'll start off by acknowledging that I am probably about to throw myself under a bus as far as you're concerned.
Much of what you post is 'good stuff', but I really can't stay quiet when you berate posters who clearly have much greater knowledge of oil exploration than you.
It's clear that you were extremely confident at your previous career. However, that does not entitle you to talk down to people who were equally proficient in their own profession.

[yoghurt73] 16/5/2022 18:47

Scot, I believe you have misinterpreted Spangles distinction and how it is framed.

I read it as......Jay often refers to Theta West in the same breath as Prudhoe Bay as the two fields have a similar order of magnitude of oil in place. PANRs OIP calc according to their modelling results based on seismic and well data, in the previous webinar for OIP Calc.....Reservoir quality is not similar though."

[chrysalis99] 16/5/2022 18:19

Hi Spangle. It's difficult for a layman to get one's head around the technicalities of the latest presentation. My interpretation was that they are using fairly comprehensively measured datasets in standard industry methodologies to generate their models (as reported) and that taking different approaches leads to similar conclusions. Would my interpretation be about right??

[spangle93] 16/5/2022 17:46

Some good catches there, Officer Digby

Jay often refers to Theta West in the same breath as Prudhoe Bay, and according to their modelling results based on seismic and well data, in the previous webinar, the two fields have a similar order of magnitude of oil in place.

Reservoir quality is not similar though. Prudhoe porosity is quoted (OK, Wikipedia, but I'm not going to dig out the technical papers) at 22%, permeability from 100mD to several Darcies, and NTG of 0.87. That would be way outside that yellow circle on slide 18.

You've seen in logs in previous webinars that fans aren't homogeneous, and that the reservoirs have multiple layers. In reality though, it's not Flow / no-flow / flow / no-flow etc - the poorer quality streaks will still have some permeability. The actual NTG will depend on the cut off they use. Nevertheless in their calculations, they have used Kv/Kh of 0.1, i.e. the oil flows horizontally 10x easier than vertically. That's not unreasonable. It would be unusual to find significant variations in oil saturation in fields of this age.

However the key in answering your concern (I think you meant heterogeneous, not homogenous, right?) is that if you drill a horizontal well, and emplace numerous vertical fractures through it, you're in fact punching through any vertical baffles caused by the depositional heterogeneity

That's on a well scale. On a field/reservoir scale, the Roger Young work should give some guidance and to variation in rock property, which I think is why LKA discounted certain areas of the field by 50% in coming to their contingent resource figures

[probabilityofsuccess] 16/5/2022 17:38

Hi OD. There’s always something that could mess it up - this ain’t binary, it’s moving up a probability curve. You ask (them), they may answer! All credit to them for sharing 😀.

Once that question has been answered, what’s your next question? Prob good to get them all out on the table now.

Edit: having read Scot’s post, it appears your question has already been answered, and welcome Spangle, for that insight!

[scot126] 16/5/2022 17:36

OfficerDigby - this was addressed in the April webinar [edit - and the January '22 webinar too]. Also, looking at the time of your post (17:17), you *couldn't possibly* have had time to listen to the presentation prior to posting. For goodness sake, man, how's about behaving as a rational commentator prior to issuing forth, by doing management and this forum the honour of at least listening to the *entire* presentation? Jeepers.

Today's presentation was outstanding. That level of detail, supported by industry-accepted calculations, is exactly what the equity market needs (and will need) to attempt to model the NPV of PANR's acreage. I can now see more clearly where Telemachus, complete with his sector expertise, was able to arrive at NPV valuations in excess of £10, even £15 per share pre- corporate IRR requirements (return requirements for industry players seeking to farm in or to purchase PANR as a corporate entity).

I will have to revise my financial model as a result of today's presentation and the information contained in the slides. Published equity analysts *may* wish to wait for feedback from Alkaid-2, but anyone contemplating building a model which examines and incorporates upside risk will be *compelled* to take today's presentation into account IMHO.

Excellent, just excellent stuff. share price goes up.

[officerdigby] 16/5/2022 17:17

OK what about oil field homogeneity in these types of fields? In homogenous local perm/poro and oil sat could mess the model up.

[astralvision] 16/5/2022 16:23

adxwasere's link in clickable form

[ngms27] 16/5/2022 16:20

Here's hoping, technical evaluation == practical reality == we're going to make a killing

[scot126] 16/5/2022 16:12

Adxwasere - well spotted.

Holy guacamole - we asked, they listened, as the official PANR twitter feed stated. The slides contain a level of detail we have not seen at any point in PANR 2.0.

Looks like we'll be hearing and reading about the process and workings behind management's statement that the '22 winter season activities support the assertion that PANR's reservoirs are commercial.

Great stuff. Bring on the presentation.

PS Just added to my holding a couple of minutes ago based on the slides on the company website.

[madd_rip] 16/5/2022 16:11

Mmm 1271 bopd. Average. Working tonight but will have a read through what I understand, and will watch vid when I can.

[forwood] 16/5/2022 16:02

Currently under the channel en route to Sardinia (not returning until 30th), so will miss the webinar. Have a good time all. Expect to see this back over 150 by the time I return ?

[adxwasere] 16/5/2022 15:57

hxxps://www.pantheonresources.com/investors/presentations/667-investor-presentation-may-2022/file

Slides are up.

[chris0805] 16/5/2022 15:26

Can't see a PANR reference in it myself but perhaps I am losing it :-(

[chris0805] 16/5/2022 15:07

https://valuesits.substack.com/?s=r&utm_campaign=pub&utm_medium=webConor Maguire update link

[parker2102] 16/5/2022 10:21

Thank you Dan de Lion
FWIW: (best case scenario?) p170 by the end of next month

[dan de lion] 16/5/2022 09:50

Zac Mir:-



PANR at approx 8 mins

[pharmawotsit] 16/5/2022 08:53

 Morning scot - ref your post 26313. Style noted and likely to account for the differences.

 Roll on 5pm.