Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[ngms27] 01/11/2021 09:54

dhb368,

I'd argue that it was the actions of others if a root cause analysis were carried out. Anyhow thats now water under the bridge. You all know where to go if you want the PANR BoD's interpretation and nothing else.

[brian boru] 01/11/2021 09:51

agreed, this is the month that funding will be confirmed by one way or another.........so let's all put a hold on personal vendettas and just report news or other significant matters but please do stress whether this a view or whether its material backed by research, GLA!

[dhb368] 01/11/2021 09:04

ngms, I welcome all input, yours included, and am not in favour of bans when filter is available, but you cannot argue with the fact that a lot of good input was lost to this board, which is now fragmented, as a direct result of your actions.

[probabilityofsuccess] 01/11/2021 08:30

Thanks for acknowledging that Forwood.

[chris0805] 01/11/2021 08:29

Agreed dhb

[officerdigby] 01/11/2021 08:29

I think that stat is trading full-stop. IE buying or selling any stock over any time frame.

So I would question that use of the stat.

Happy to see some evidence either way..

[winner66] 01/11/2021 08:25

I think it’s worth pointing out industry wide statistics on trading , ie taking a position short term and generating a profit. The statics show that this strategy only 30 percent of people win . A 3 out of 10 chance . Far better to research the medium and longer term potential and invest accordingly.

[forwood] 01/11/2021 08:22

ok pos,so I did, but the distinction is still valid.

[spangle93] 01/11/2021 07:44

"This is the worst board I've ever seen on ADVFN."

You haven't been anywhere near BLOE then? Wise man! ;-)

[ngms27] 01/11/2021 07:30

Forwood, I personally don't think charts work on shares like this but you have every right to post and should continue to do so.

This board has been constantly ruined by scott126 with his aggressive manner who thinks its his way or the highway. No other views will be tolerated. Then the head of the Spanish Inquisition PoS spends every waking hour breaking you down trying to get a confession.

This is the worst board I've ever seen on ADVFN.

[chris0805] 01/11/2021 07:26

Repost of my 18551 from yesterday. Received lots of upticks... Also agreed? Personal attacks will get none of us anywhere. If you don?t like someone else?s view point it?s easy to scroll past or filter them. Please can all contributors to the thread stick to the investment case for PANR & get this thread back to the quality source of information that it used to be..Some just can not resist a slanging match sadly. Such a pity.

[michaelsadvfn] 01/11/2021 07:23

Share prices go up and down all the time. You appear to think it's virtuous to ignore such changes and that pointing them out is morally dubious. I don't, and believe charting is an essential tool in helping people to time their trades.

Quite right.

[probabilityofsuccess] 01/11/2021 06:16

Hi Forwood - #18369 “are you a fool or are you awake”. YOUR WORDS.

I had tried to draw a line in previous post but you seemingly can’t accept what you wrote. Happy to draw a line again but please look at the WORDS YOU WROTE. Please check YOUR post. I’m not making this up!

[forwood] 01/11/2021 04:26

Scot and pos: I hope you understand that people really don't want to read this stuff but yet you persist. And I certainly don't want to spend time answering your allegations. If you continue to prolong this 'debate' into my character and motives, I shall try to ignore it, save for this:

The explanation for the limited no. of posts in the run up to the 29 Sept is almost entirely explained by constraints due to a) my needing to change broker, and b) social and domestic arrangements relating to my son's much delayed marriage reception.

As to the 'change of heart', this followed the chart topping out. The tail does not wag the dog! I think you should also consider that I might respond to the intense denial and chart hate posts by increasingly pointing to the evidence.

Share prices go up and down all the time. You appear to think it's virtuous to ignore such changes and that pointing them out is morally dubious. I don't, and believe charting is an essential tool in helping people to time their trades.

If I was interested in changing sentiment towards PANR, I might have made a better job of it by making more of the things that have suddenly gone wrong, the selling by F and others, and by reference to climate change activists calling for the banning of all new oil and gas projects!

If you wish to continue trolling me on this issue, that's unfortunately your right but I don't think many will appreciate it. Frankly, I think your attempts to silence me are utterly disgraceful !


pos - you keep claiming that I called ITTW a fool rather than asking whether he was 'foolish or awake'. I posed a similar question to you in the hope that you might understand that point. I think there's a difference. You apparently don't, but having gone on about this now for several somewhat sterile exchanges, I think it's time to move on.

[tizo100] 31/10/2021 23:47

I totally agree with you Scot126

[scot126] 31/10/2021 23:00

No need to be sorry, unlikely2. Here's a suggestion for you. Just move the scroll wheel on your mouse (or hit the down arrow on your keyboard) a couple of centimetres downwards and you won't have to read my post. Or blocking me works just as well. Dinnae fret, I won't be offended in the slightest.

Prof Sir forwood the Unveiled needed a "caveat emptor" label attached to his recent grubby trading posts. He might not like it but he's now got one. And I will happily use post #18555 again if he repeats the behaviour at issue in the future.

[unlikely2] 31/10/2021 22:06

Sorry Scot - absolutely irrelevant garbage. Not much time for Forwood either. Why don't you two get a room and thrash it out, and leave the thread to investors without egos.

[scot126] 31/10/2021 21:28

FYI - ANS West Coast crude was $85.25 per barrel on 27/10/21 v's Brent at $84.58

About this whole 'Prof Sir forwood the Unveiled' debate:

(i) Taken to its ultimate conclusion, his strategy would have every single shareholder of every single listed stock globally placing a sell order down to 1p/1c on Monday and attempting to buy it all back on the Tuesday.

(ii) His strategy relies on the relative inertia of fundamental investors (like wot I am) together with the vast, vast majority of shareholders in whichever stock he fancies trading. Along with the regular macro tidal flows, it also relies on him and those of his ilk inserting and amplifying short term doubt into the sentiment/minds of other, perhaps less sophisticated, shareholders.

(iii) Naturally, this strategy can be punished severely by the market “gapping up” if a stock is bid for at a healthy premium or if, to pick out a scenario quite randomly (!), an AIM E&P company was to sign a farm out agreement thus securing its anticipated winter programme. In complete fairness to Prof Sir forwood he does acknowledge the presence of such risks although I note he is unusually fierce in his contention that the market is already discounting the certainty of securing the anticipated winter programme. Not unreasonably he points to historical events but then, unreasonably IMHO, refuses to acknowledge the logic of the counter-argument which contends the VAS results from Talitha-A and the purchase of 65k acres at auction (now known as Theta West) makes the calculation this time around very, very different indeed.

(iv) I really didn’t wish to go all forensic on Prof Sir forwood but I was very taken by PoS’s explanation about simply repeating back to him his own words. My motivation is not to belittle Prof Sir forwood, although it is patently clear our core values are dissimilar. Rather it is simply to provide evidence for the unimpeachable view that Prof Sir forwood has, since 29/9/21 been talking his own *trading* book.

- On 13/10/21, Prof Sir forwood informed us, “I sold well over a week ago.”

- Ok, acting on that info I looked back around 10-14 days prior to that date. The share price moved up quite markedly from 27/9 – 5/10, from the low 60’s to 80p. Examining the content of Prof Sir forwood’s posts, the previously overwhelmingly positive tone appears to change on 29/9/21 to one of negativity. The date on which his post did a 180 degree turn was 29/9/21 which certainly tallies with his admission on the 13/10/21 that he “sold over a week ago.”

- It’s a clumsy metric but let’s examine the number of posts in the 10 days leading up to 29/9/21 and the 10 days afterwards?

From 19/9 – 28/9, Prof Sir forwood published 5 posts and zero charts [he posted 1 chart in the 19 days from 1/9 – 19/9, fyi.]

And looking at the 10 days after his dramatic shift in sentiment?
From 30/9 – 9/10, Prof Sir forwood posted 21 times, including 1 chart [he posted 8 charts in the 20 days from 10/10 – 29/10. Eight charts, huh? Hmmm.....]


Just the facts, folks! Now before anyone replies with a treatise on the morals of capitalism and personal motivations, etc, etc I wish to repeat the following so I’m not misunderstood or misquoted in any way. Using this case as an example, Prof Sir forwood is welcome to apply or redirect his capital as he sees fit. It’s none of my business what he chooses to do with his money, just as it’s none of his business what I elect to do with mine.

His critics are simply highlighting to those who are perhaps less focussed on the minutiae of this thread that Prof Sir forwood adopted a dramatic 180 degree shift in the tone of his postings just at the time when he self-admittedly opened a trading short.

And that, too, is fine. Prof Sir forwood has done nothing illegal, nothing criminal, none of that stuff. What he has done, however, is elected to use his prolific presence on this particular thread to influence the sentiment of thread users in order to advance the profitability (or reduction in loss) of his recent trading strategy.

To be clear, that too is not illegal, not criminal. However, despite any protestations to the contrary from the 30 year “DMA trader” this is most decidedly NOT how professional market participants conduct themselves. Such conduct is viewed as being a bit on the nose, “not really the done thing”, “it's a bit off”. Such behaviour is seen, rightly IMHO, as being disingenuous and, in my experience, leads to other market participants nudging their peers to warn them about the trustworthiness of the person being disingenuous.

What else was he meant to do? Simple - just say nothing. Adopt the trading short if that’s what he wished to do, no worries. But having established a presence on a public forum which showed a consistent willingness to support the PANR investment case, “it’s just not on” to then use that profile to provide impetus for one's own suddenly contrary trading position.

I recall there was a debate about Prof Sir forwood’s time in the markets. I appreciate fully he did not claim to be employed by any specific institution, investment bank, fund manager, hedge fund, etc, etc. Had he done so, he would have learned that professional market participants take a dim view of such conduct and instead of defending himself would have just admitted it, dried his eyes and either ‘fessed up and said, “My bad, won’t do it again” *or* “Readers of this thread ought to view all of my posts whilst chanting ‘Caveat Emptor’ to themselves!”


PS Can’t help wondering if Prof Sir forwood The Unveiled opened his trading short on or before 27/9/21? Now that would be a pity! 😉

PPS There's still an easy fix IMHO. A TA/short term trading proponent opens up a separate, but cross-indexed, PANR thread for TA/short term trading content only. I note previous rejections of this suggestion. That said, what is it the TA/traders are afraid of in not adopting such a suggestion? Is is an admission their strategy in trading small caps with comparatively low levels of institutional ownership and with binary outcome characteristics relies heavily on those self-same traders affecting the sentiment of those investors less sophisticated than they are? Hmmm......

[probabilityofsuccess] 31/10/2021 17:31

Hi Forwood - not on your back, just reading your comments and playing them back to you to ensure both you, I and other contributors/readers don’t miss anything. A response, from you, in a ‘less emotional’ way shall we say, may help. So, for example, my last posts about you calling people fools for not trading - you didn’t respond in any manner which suggested you acknowledged or recognised you had done that…….you just took it personally and asked a question back. A simple acknowledgement of what you had done or, indeed, your rejection of my argument would have put it to bed (one way or the other).

Nothing personal at all, if you genuinely feel that, I apologise - I don’t know you from Adam so as far as I’m concerned you are equal to all other contributors in the sense that I can only interpret your intentions from what you write - you are just a set of words and claimed actions on a screen. The vast majority are absolutely clear with their intentions (I don’t agree with some comments, but there is little uncertainty in what the authors mean) and you have now made your intentions clear (not a criticism at all, thank you for that).

For the record, I have no issue whatsoever with TA. I don’t use it, but I fully understand others do and are interested in the commentary.

I will continue to comment as I see appropriate on your and anyone else’s posts. I can assure you it isn’t personal, it’s purely based on content.

Chris, per my comment immediately above, I would suggest that calling people fools for not considering trading PANR impacts, or at minimum looks to influence, the investment case, hence I called it out.

All, feel free to scroll past this post or filter me (if you do the latter though, I suggest you don’t commit it in writing and then do what I have seen many do and reply to future comments to those they have filtered, as it suggests you only ‘filter’ for effect!).

Having said all that, general feeling of board contributors considered 👍. A clean slate from my perspective - let’s look to a potentially exciting week coming up.

[bit coin] 31/10/2021 16:58

Fingers xxxxxx'd for an exciting week ............. Or two !!

[rideacockhorse] 31/10/2021 15:27

I see in today's Sunday Telegraph, Questor tips BP with statements such as:

" The irony about "ethical" investing is that its advocates will end up making shareholders in oil companies richer."

Questor points out the old oil cycle of growing demand leading to investment in new supplies which then oversupplies the market causing prices to fall, has broken because of the ethical investment lobby. In turn, without new sources of supply prices will rise and oil companies will become very rich indeed because they won't be investing in new supplies, hence the BUY recommendation for BP.

OK, PANR's not an oil producing company but the industry has not turned its back on all new sources of supply just yet. What a high risk play PANR is but if they can get on the right side of this final oil spike what a HUGE return shareholders could get. Admittedly, the downside is pretty steep too but you only live once....

[chris0805] 31/10/2021 13:10

Also agreed... Personal attacks will get none of us anywhere. If you don't like someone else's view point it's easy to scroll past or filter them. Please can all contributors to the thread stick to the investment case for PANR & get this thread back to the quality source of information that it used to be..