Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[squiresquire] 17/4/2023 08:33

Is Scott taking part in the placing,best to follow his lead.....errrrr

[forwood] 17/4/2023 07:21

Jaknife, I'm unsure whether the search function here is able to uncover deleted posts. Perhaps I should test that with your frequent use of the terminal 'lying shysters' to describe Pantheon management. Semantically very little difference to the claims of fraudulent promote. Such baseless claims need calling out wherever they originate from and your posted links reminded me of that.

[mlf51] 17/4/2023 06:39

I see the usual suspects are back on twitter and discord spewing the old Scott is a German fraudster story, they must be getting worried.

[olderwiser2] 17/4/2023 05:25

Pro
Black and white statements like this are foolish in the extreme

"And no farm out simply means nobody in the industry values what they have"

Why would you ignore the blindingly obvious other possibility, the farminee pitches an offer that is unsatisfactory. No BOD goes into negotiations, determined to accept an offer, they would rightly reject a low ball offer.

They have a valuable asset, lets not go giving it away, there are plenty of potential buyers out there

Particularly as it is the foundation document to a much longer relationship, that is supposed to be good business for both parties, if PANR accept getting a sub par deal in the beginning it will only get worse down the line

I recognize it is your current project, to create a climate of fear from a vacuum, but this is plain stupidity

[pro_s2009] 17/4/2023 01:55

I have not seen anyone call PANR a fraud........seems to be the losing argument of the Uber Bulls....... accuse anyone negative of calling PANR a fraud and then go bleating off to the PANR management and ask them to take action against this nasty poster.

PANR management will be sensible enough to know this is a results based business, you sink or swin by the results, real fact.....not opinions, not thoughts, not hopes, not expectations....

This is why the coming farm out, or not........will show the true value of PANR.

Lets see.

And no farm out simply means nobody in the industry values what they have, and have done, very highly or very well. Farm outs, like JOG which has made me a lot of money, is the true valuation of assets. And if people dont want to farm in, it means your assets are not at all interesting enough.

[forwood] 16/4/2023 23:27

Jaknife, I am reasonably sure of my memory of you calling Pantheon a fraudulent promote but as you have deleted posts it's a little difficult to prove - or deny come to that! BTW, if you are so sure that you what you say here and elsewhere would not be held to account in court, why do you delete your posts?

[rabito79] 16/4/2023 22:35

Haha, Dunning Kruger effect. Perhaps you can tell us then JakNife, what are your qualifications in estimating the probability of oil exploration success. It's just there has been two technical RNS that you have failed to understand.The first being the Schlumberger flow modelling which came out with higher figures than Pantheon and the Schlumberger's OIP estimates which produced upgrades in OIP for two of three plays modelled (the third being lower as it included less acreage than Pantheon's). There's another point here regards your misunderstanding of how CPRs/IERs are produced and the assumption they don't use raw data from the well logs/cores etc.The second being your inability to understand the flow rate RNS, where you confused the condy/NGLs with gas. However despite these glaring mistakes you seem confident you can make estimates of probability of appraisal success. To me this sounds very much like the Dunning Kruger effect you described.To be fair though you are kind of rewriting history here anyway. When you first came to the board you announced you took a position because your mate phoned you and said Jay Cheatham was a fraud and you have since made multiple similar comments. Of course it's difficult to say for definite you used the word fraud as you delete almost all your posts.I am definitely a naive investor, but luckily (or perhaps you would call it skill) I took some of my money if the table on the way up having loaded up post Talitha results at 20p. What I will fully admit I had been naive to was the ability of Swiss fund manager to post a falsified document copying well known shorters (not you) who used it to make allegations of fraud. I must admit I thought this brazen illegality would have been acted upon by the regulators. I was also naive in thinking former industry professionals would not have an issue with this, indeed some (you) actually think there should be more of it.Call me old fashioned but this type of thing goes against my morales. I could tell you a long tedious story involving my kids here but I won't.

[maxxy1] 16/4/2023 16:56

Stupid are those who waste their time on boards where they are not even invested. Pity

[padamster] 16/4/2023 09:19

I sense news this week 😊

[probabilityofsuccess] 15/4/2023 17:46

Jak “You see I'm basically more experienced than you in everything that matters!”

You seem to think you know who I am!

[probabilityofsuccess] 15/4/2023 14:01

Jak - you have stated the BoD are liars in the context of what they are representing. I trust you have a good enough understanding of both criminal and civil law to understand the meaning of fraudulent misrepresentation and the definitions of that. As such, your historical statements about calling them liars and then also saying that you haven’t used the ‘f’ word (we assume you mean ‘fraud’!) isn’t compatible. Anyway, best of luck! 😀

[madd_rip] 15/4/2023 13:57

Scam has the same meaning as fraud. So already you're lying, quell surprise.

[rabito79] 15/4/2023 07:30

Reasonable points of debate, like repeatedly calling it a fraud. Saying you can’t trust any third party reports because they are paid for. Supporting the use of falsified documents shared on Twitter by Swiss Fund Managers.


Yes that’s right, all perfectly reasonable.


What JakNife and the numerous other bears fail to acknowledge is that for the bears point to proven there needs to be evidence of fraud. Exploration or appraisal failure is not fraud, particularly when it has been supported by independent third party analysis.